Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Player Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: Trotsky on December 26, 2013, 06:25:02 PM
-
Is there any possibility of some alternative art work for the female mages? I find the current artwork is in stark contrast to the male characters. Whereas the male characters are dressed appropriately for combat the female characters are a little underdressed. This anomaly detracts from otherwise fine artwork.
-
I agree. So far the only female mage we've seen that isn't wearing clothes better suited to a porno or S&M scene is the Wizard...and she isn't even in the game yet.
Unfortunately there are no better-dressed versions of the females mages. It's one of the few things that really bothers me about this game.
-
None of the mages are dressed appropriately for combat when they first enter the arena. That's what equipment spells are for.
That being said, Mages are a lot less fragile than normal humans. A normal human usually has about 10 life. A Mage can have more than three times that amount! They can survive being slashed at with a sword without any armor, and without bleeding all over the place. When they're incapacitated from a heavy blow, they get back up fairly quickly, and don't enter a coma. They can take an arrow to the knee and still run! While their physical strength is about the same as a non-magical person, their durability is FAR greater.
If the female Mages were wearing high heels and constricting corsets, then I would be worried too. But I looked, and none of the current mages wear high heels or corsets. The Priestess isn't wearing high heels, she's wearing boots and holding one of her feet up. The Druid wears sandals. The Johktari Beastmaster goes barefooted. And the Forcemaster is completely covered and is wearing boots. While I admit that their outfits are a bit more revealing around the chest area, they are not obscenely so. Why every single female mage so far has big breasts could be chalked up to either coincidence or their bodies being enhanced by the presence of magic in them. It would be nice if other genders were represented in Mage Wars though. However, there are only ten mages so far, and most people are a bit prejudiced about any gender that isn't "standard". I'm guessing that if and when we have a shapeshifter mage, they will be a gender-fluid man or woman who can change their sex. (the card art would depict whatever form they start in).
Also, for instance, at first I thought that an original Sympath would be a woman. Then I remembered that Sympathetic magic is focused on imitation and correspondence; copy mechanics. So a Sympath could probably be another gender-fluid mage if we ever get one, although they would be unable to change their sex, unlike the Shapeshifter.
(Gender is psychological and cultural, while Sex is merely outward physical characteristics. They're not the same thing, contrary to popular belief.)
While I agree with you that it is slightly sexist that the female mages' outfits are so form fitting and they all have large breasts, ultimately I think that is a bit trivial. Not only that, but I think it is inevitable at the moment. There are more men than women who play games like Mage Wars (or at least people think that's the case). Furthermore, most people in the world are sexist, even when they're certain they're not. I'm fairly sure that if Arcane Wonders started making mages with non-conforming genders and sexes at this time, the game would not sell as well. It's unfortunate, but right now Arcane Wonders has to appeal to a sexist audience in order to gain attention and increase the game's popularity. Or at least, that's how I see it. I could be wrong.
-
This is an issue close to my heart for so many reasons. Of my first 50 comments on the Mage Wars forums, ~30 were in a thread I started on this subject. It might have been the first thread I started as a new member. The discussion was civil and thoughtful (and for my part, heavily illustrated). Sadly, that thread was moved to the off-topic area, and then deleted during the forum migration along with the rest of off-topic. Please believe me when I say that this issue has my attention, and I feel it is unfinished.
My opinions on this issue are complicated. Overall, I agree with Aylin and Trotsky: the depiction of women in Mage Wars is one of the few things that really bothers me in what is otherwise a remarkably excellent game.
When Anita Sarkeesian starts each installment of Tropes vs. Women, she gives a now standard disclaimer: that pointing out a sexist flaw in work you love does not prevent you from loving the rest of the work, or the work taken as a whole. And I do love Mage Wars, and to work with the designers and other play-testers who have made this game so beautiful is a great privilege.
But as a play-tester, I have responsibilities as well as privileges. In one sense, everything that I help create is partially my responsibility. But while I certainly hope to have my name written on the inside front cover of the next expansion, not everything that comes in that box will be as I want it. I suspect I'll disagree with other play-testers how to handle Iron Golem. I know I'll disagree with at least one designer about the value of Teleport. And, relevant to this conversation, I will probably not yet have my way on art direction for women's character models and costume. For my failures in this, I can only apologize. I know we can do better, and I feel we must.
Now, I want to stress that I'm speaking for myself, as an individual only. I am not a spokesperson for Arcane Wonders, and working as a play-tester is as close to a volunteer position as the law allows. The only official statement Arcane Wonders has made on this issue is that they have continued to print new pinup-y art for the women's mage card illustrations. But art assets are purchased well ahead of time, and even if a dramatic course correction were made today, its effects might not be visible in new product for at least a year's time. I do not know what current thinking is on this matter, and even if I did, I would not be allowed to discuss it.
But generally, I do believe that geek-culture has a reckoning coming to it, that -- to paraphrase William Gibson -- it thinks it's too smart to be sexist. And the art issue is only part of the broader issue of sexism in gaming: I cringe at the reaction whenever Alfiya Pope's picture is posted on the Mage Wars Facebook page. She's frequently in group photos with Bryan or Patrick or others, at cons or shows, always dressed in the same conservative black polo shirt that the rest of the crew wears, or in a blue business suit. And without fail, someone in the comments treats her like a booth babe. But no one ever cat-calls Bryan.
Obviously I can't speak for Alfiya, and I don't mean to imply that I agree with her or that she agrees with me (I don't know her). The last time I brought up gender issues on AW forums, overall some people agreed with me, some more did not, and truthfully, most were indifferent. But this issue is important to me, so I thought it might be time to revisit it. Thank you for the opportunity.
There's so much more to say about this: about gender's role in the marketing practice of segmentation, about the art-historical role of costume, gender and orentalized sexuality in the depiction of "the other", about Watsonian versus Doyalist explanations for appearance, etc. But it's past midnight, and I don't want to monopolize this conversation... like I did last time. If anyone wants to PM me about this, I'd be happy to hear from you.
-Bon courage!
-
Im just going to say:
There is Multiple threads for this already. Multiple
And these threads often lead to disagreement with no resolution, and sometimes heated arguments:
Lets keep it light guys. There are opinions and one big gray area.
-
I just searched the forums for either of the keywords "female" or "woman" and did not find many at all. Perhaps you could link me to some? There were only ~30 results total, and most didn't seem relevant. They were all civil and respectful, though, so I wonder what you mean by your tone complaint?
-
Ringkichard
What you just did is exactly what DDD was talking about. So perhaps there aren't that many other threads about this, and DDD was wrong to think that there were. That's no reason to snap at him.
This issue is just as important to me as it is to you, if not more so. However, I don't want to invite explosive controversy into a game I love before it becomes popular enough to handle it safely. This forum isn't just viewed by people who currently play mage wars, but also by prospective players. And even if your previous discussions about this on the forums were civil, I would probably chalk that up to pure dumb luck and a smaller forum community.
Have you seen how heated many of us get about in game rules issues? Do you really think it's realistic to expect everyone to be civil when they engage in or even just see this much more significant real-life topic of discussion? No matter what one's views are on this topic, most people who read about it get upset.
What do you think most prospective players would think when they see us arguing on these forums about the finer points of politics, society, history and philosophy, instead of mage wars? They would think, "these are angry stuffy people who can't just relax and enjoy the game". Or maybe they'll think that "mage wars is too complex and stressful to get into, hence why people argue about other things." Neither of those are true of course, but that doesn't change the real possibility that people might think that and that those thoughts will influence how well mage wars sells.
We should keep this sort of discussion to private messaging, at least for now. That way only forum members will see it.
-
Well there were many- there were many on BGG- I have seen them...Im not going to even look for them to give a link. And if something had happened to them- there must be a good reason. (Such as there are WAY to many of the same thread, or they got out of hand)
And my tone was that of- I have seen this thread 20 times before.
And yeah- All I was trying to say that I have seen them end badly, and that everyone should be prepared for the conversation at hand and remember to remain respectful.
Sorry if I have somehow offended you Ringkichard with however you interpreted my "tone". (I didn't feel however that you lashed out or anything! ;D )
And I chose not to add to the conversation since, I have been threw it a few times before on threads that apparently are not around anymore.
-
I would be happy if some alternative art versions were available, even printable ones - any chance this might happen?
-
You know- with the print and play model gaining some ground- thats a great idea.
I think youre really on to something Trotsky.
I mean- its just a mage card...why not.
-
(Dons flameproof Elemental Cloak and ventures into this political minefield...)
Mage Wars is escapism in a Swords & Sorcery world.
Swords & Sorcery, epitomised by Frank Frazetta's "classic" Conan art, is incredibly sexist in its depictions.
Frank Frazetta sexualised both the women and the men in his art (some Conan art was very homoerotic).
If anyone has read Robert Howard's Conan books, they are incredibly sexist, a sign of the times back then.
We have Lotus Nightshade and maybe other reverential references to Conan literature within Mage Wars.
Howard wasn't a Professor of Linguistics like Tolkien who created languages, he was pure Pulp Fantasy.
Does its background Sword & Sorcery heritage make the blatant sexualisation of women in Pulp Fantasy ok?
No, it's not ok. But it's in keeping with the 70s retro tone that most of the Mage Wars art so far seems to have.
The real question is: "is it offensive?"
If the setting was not Pulp Fantasy but is meant to portray a possible reality in a distant way (say cyberpunk), yes.
In Netrunner, I take issue with Director Haas as I feel it panders to IT geek misogyny, hating their savvy female superiors.
However, I found buxom advertising resources like Eve Campaign to be sufficiently knowing, self-parodying, not offensive.
In fact FFG cleverly played it safe, releasing Adonis Campaign first in Core Set to deflect accusations of sexism.
Would Big Bang Theory work if Penny and Amy were reversed in looks? No, it wouldn't because looks do matter.
Nor would it work if Leonard looked like one of the jocks Penny dated; our hero has to look like an archetypal geek.
This show's stereotyping works both ways and self-deprecating humour (often at the expense of geeks) is why it works.
We all stereotype, no matter how politically correct we think we are.
Joss Whedon has made a career of mixing genre stereotypes to "break the mould".
Space + Cowboys
High School + Vampires (+ Musicals in the classic "Once More With Feeling" episode)
This mixing genres means he plays on stereotypes, even if he sometimes subverts it.
Does anyone ever ask: "why is it that all Vampire Slayers are beautiful?"
(And yes, the bad one with the ironical name is just that little bit more...)
Maybe beauty is part of the job description for being "The Chosen One"...
This is very difficult because I'm normally a political correct person (belonging to at least 2 minorities).
But gaming, especially this game which is so theme heavy like a roleplaying duel, is pure escapism.
I've therefore come to the conclusion that stereotyping in escapist literature is fine if that genre is far from reality.
This "distance from reality" check is an important criteria so as to ensure perception is not transfered to real life.
Because that's when it stops being harmless fun and becomes detrimental to the objectified societal segment.
We all (even if in denial) associate racial stereotypes, both in real life and in fantasy.
Gender stereotyping will occur because men and women are instrinscally different.
To pretend otherwise is do a disservice to the strengths of each gender that we should celebrate.
It is no coincidence that Star Trek Voyager's ratings went up after Seven of Nine was introduced.
And that's crucial here: this game is trying to appeal to the broadest segment of its target market.
It needs to appeal because it needs to sell; that's the bottom line here, not a political statement.
Geeks are often inadvertently sexist.
The stereotype that geeks are awkward around women is, like many stereotypes, based on a common trait.
I don't think there's any harm meant by this passive sexism; it's more an indicator of a lack of understanding.
I know I'm horribly generalising here, that this stems from insecurities etc - but self-awareness is important.
Pulp Fantasy is by definition a gross simplification.
Everything is black and white: there is Good and there is Evil (ok, there may be a Neutral grade in-between).
It doesn't go for depth like how the Surgeon seeking an elixir for his dead daughter became a Necromancer.
It doesn't explore the tyranny of too much holy law and the need for individuality but not to excess (Babylon 5).
It doesn't blur the borders of delusion and belief and ask you: "what makes something real?" (Philip K. Dick).
Pulp Fantasy does not do character motivation, philosphy or blur reality like the best sci fi & fantasy out there.
Mage Wars is Pulp Fantasy.
It's not a bad thing because sometimes you just want that brainless action movie - because it's entertaining!
It is a license to escape into a simpler world where we can simply associate tropes ingrained in our psyche.
Elves are effete, drink wine (or elderberry juice), often vegetarian, maybe eco-warriors, maybe logical (Vulcan)
Dwarves are gruff, quaff ale, sharpen axes, wear piercings and tattoos, honour death in battle (Viking, Klingon)
Goblins are short, cunning, back-stabbing, avaricious, hatch plots that backfire hence often comedic (Ferengi)
Everything in Pulp Fantasy is a Cypher.
That's why Mage Wars gets away with it.
However...
I advise MW to appeal to more than Middle America's White Male Heterosexuals if they are to break new markets.
The occasional humourous subversion of these cliche stereotypes would be great.
Everything is po-faced, even flavour text, that this lack of poking fun at itself makes depictions more dangerous.
We see this role-reversal in Pixar animation where the beautiful damsel rescues the prince (it's become cliche).
There is absolutely no such subversion in Mage Wars: it's so straightforwardly stereotypical, it's embarrassing.
Geeks are blessed with intelligence and frankly, some of it may condescend them.
I would bet that MW sales per capita in Middle America are better than the Coasts.
I know politically America has become 2 countries but is it also the same culturally?
Here in the UK (and I bet our German posters may agree), sexism is a major issue.
MW can play the "oh it's so delightfully retro chic it's avant garde" card only for so long.
It really needs to break out of its anachronisms if it wants to appeal to other societies.
So my position on Mage Wars art depiction of females is that it needs to step up a gear.
Add humour so that any perceived sexism can be deflected as lacking a sense of humour.
Make it work both ways - yes, that does mean an armoured Xena and a Tarzan-like himbo.
Subvert stereotypes (carnivorous plants was a lost opportunity for humourous vegetarian diet flavour text).
Don't patronise fans: it's a complex game and its fans are proud of their intelligence so pander to it instead.
In short, please be more subtle with your female depictions?
Because currently there may be US Coastal and European markets that view its retro art as anachronistic.
Retro is a fashion with no longevity unless tongue-in-cheek.
My grandmother uses racist language; I think many grandparents do and we accept it as generation culture.
When I look at Mage Wars art, I view it as Middle America, still stuck in Frazetta's scantily clad nubile women.
Just like my grandmother with her racist language, no malice is intended, it's just a culturally associated trope.
That's why I am less stressed than Kich on this - I just hope a more international perspective is adopted soon.
(A textbook example on how to anger both camps - my work is done here...)
-
I'm not trying to distract from the points made, but I'm honestly curious. What is wrong with the forcemaster's art?
-
This discussion has become far more earnest than my initial post intended. Whilst I find some of the current depictions archaic and adolescent (particularly the female characters pronounced cleavage) I am not calling on Arcane Wonders to ‘change’ their art style only to make available ‘alternative’ versions that some of us would be more comfortable using, this in turn may make the game more accessible to others – I have had two people refuse to play the game based on their perception of the representation of female characters – alternative artwork would allow me to attempt re-engage them in a game I really enjoy – and my list of opponents is too small not to try.
-
THat is unforchanet you have people who wish not to play the game with you.
COuld they just be happy if you take said cards out of your games???
Or you could try and reason with them (IDK if that would help your case in your situation, but if it was me...), I would ask them if they avoid television, internet, magazines with advertisements, or shopping malls since, they all too have a sexiest representation of females....and all of those mediums go a step further and are not pandering to just 20-30 year old males, but most often to other women, and young girls.
Again, I dont know if that would be a good route for you- but thats just what I would say. And it wouldn't hurt to ask that if you removed those cards from you game if it would be alright to play.
You could always print out your own, or use miniatures. See if that would help ;D
-
I'm not trying to distract from the points made, but I'm honestly curious. What is wrong with the forcemaster's art?
You got me bang to rights there! As I've written almost every time I've posted about the Forcemaster...
Let's face it, she looks far cooler than the other mages (although Jokhtari may beg to differ).
Yes, she is an awesome-looking clothed female Jedi/Sith Lord, proof that you don't need to keep them in bikinis.
However, would it be unfair to say that this isn't always the case?
I don't have the cards but is Samandriel (most powerful female creature) in a bikini like Jokhtari and Priestess?
This is so dangerous posting at work without the cards but I'm sure I'd subconsciously spotted a subtext here.
Women in Etheria prefer to sunbathe, not shop (oh dear, I'm gonna get clobbered by the PC brigade for that).
As Kich said elsewhere about a male and female of a new race: "he's dressed for the streets. she's dressed for the sheets".
Hey, this isn't my battle, it's Kich's: I just understand both views (you know what sitting on the fence gives you).
I'm personally fine with the art but the marketer in me thinks you should tone it down - or better still subvert it.
Imagine a female posing like in Michaelangelo's Thinker?
Or a male emerging from a shell like in Botticelli's Venus?
Ok, both too cultural as in-jokes but I'm sure there are US archetypes you can subvert.
It would just help to knowingly poke fun at fantasy tropes.
A bearded Dwarf Dowager berserker, with female breastplate, would solve that age old mystery...
It's really difficult because if you take a risk (like the Necromancer book which I love), you'll offend some people.
But if you don't take risks, you become stale and cliche to your "seen it all before" jaded market.
All I am proposing is a bit more humour, subverting what we fantasy fans expect - but in a way that doesn't jar.
Hey, I'm personally fine with your art (Nightshade Lotus is an incredibly beautiful masterpiece).
I just think you could alienate unexplored markets so should make Etheria feel less old-fashion.
So far the only non-white face is a savage barbarian shaman (female so scantily clad) who resists the colonising crusaders.
I'm not offended by it at all (in fact, I've said Kumanjaro is seeped in thematic strength).
But you can see how that sole depiction could be viewed, a very white colonial mindset.
All we're missing is a mincing elf bard and his spikey-haired warrior-maiden bodyguard and we'll have a full set!
Yes, the Forcemaster art is excellent and, with her brooding cowl, the best depiction of a mage of either gender.
-
I'm not trying to distract from the points made, but I'm honestly curious. What is wrong with the forcemaster's art?
It's a bit more subtle than most of the others, but from her card and the box art it's clear that she's wearing wedge-style thigh-high boots and a skin-tight leather corset (you can see the boning).
Heels, even wedge-style ones, are highly impractical for walking over any ground that isn't flat. Even running over flat ground in them isn't a good idea (one pebble has a good chance of making you twist your ankle), and they're on a mage that fights in melee over uneven ground.
And of course, corsets restrict your mobility and breathing...both of which make engaging in combat more difficult.
Some of her other clothes are also ill-suited to combat, but they're not nearly as bad (skirt, cloak, choker).
-
Have you seen how heated many of us get about in game rules issues? Do you really think it's realistic to expect everyone to be civil when they engage in or even just see this much more significant real-life topic of discussion? No matter what one's views are on this topic, most people who read about it get upset.
What do you think most prospective players would think when they see us arguing on these forums about the finer points of politics, society, history and philosophy, instead of mage wars? They would think, "these are angry stuffy people who can't just relax and enjoy the game". Or maybe they'll think that "mage wars is too complex and stressful to get into, hence why people argue about other things." Neither of those are true of course, but that doesn't change the real possibility that people might think that and that those thoughts will influence how well mage wars sells.
We should keep this sort of discussion to private messaging, at least for now. That way only forum members will see it.
As long as the discussion is civil (and moderators can remove posts only meant to inflame or edit out insults and the like in other posts), what exactly is the problem with talking about it? Some people (who actually visit the forums) might dislike that we're talking about it in a sub-forum not devoted entirely to rules, game mechanics, spells, strategy, etc. but most wouldn't I suspect. Also you're ignoring prospective players who might see the discussion and be happy that current players want to make the game better (by reducing sexism).
-
(Dons flameproof Elemental Cloak and ventures into this political minefield...)
Mage Wars is escapism in a Swords & Sorcery world.
Swords & Sorcery, epitomised by Frank Frazetta's "classic" Conan art, is incredibly sexist in its depictions.
Frank Frazetta sexualised both the women and the men in his art (some Conan art was very homoerotic).
If anyone has read Robert Howard's Conan books, they are incredibly sexist, a sign of the times back then.
We have Lotus Nightshade and maybe other reverential references to Conan literature within Mage Wars.
Howard wasn't a Professor of Linguistics like Tolkien who created languages, he was pure Pulp Fantasy.
Does its background Sword & Sorcery heritage make the blatant sexualisation of women in Pulp Fantasy ok?
No, it's not ok. But it's in keeping with the 70s retro tone that most of the Mage Wars art so far seems to have.
The real question is: "is it offensive?"
The answer is yes. Pointing out other instances of bigotry (against various groups) doesn't make this one more ok.
This is very difficult because I'm normally a political correct person (belonging to at least 2 minorities).
I'm pretty surprised at you over this one, honestly. I don't even know how to respond to this right now. Just...wow.
But gaming, especially this game which is so theme heavy like a roleplaying duel, is pure escapism.
I've therefore come to the conclusion that stereotyping in escapist literature is fine if that genre is far from reality.
This "distance from reality" check is an important criteria so as to ensure perception is not transfered to real life.
Because that's when it stops being harmless fun and becomes detrimental to the objectified societal segment.
Can't the game be escapist without the sexism?
And is the game supposed to only be escapist for men? It's fairly hard to "escape" from a world where way too many people think the value of women is solely based on their looks and cooking skill into a world where...all the women are wearing either super-skimpy or ridiculous outfits obviously designed to appeal to the aforementioned people.
And, to broaden the conversation a little bit, is it only supposed to be escapist for white people? The only non-white mage that isn't a fantasy monster is the J. Beastmaster...who is depicted as a savage fighting off white colonial invaders.
We all (even if in denial) associate racial stereotypes, both in real life and in fantasy.
That doesn't make those racial stereotypes ok, or something that should just be ignored.
Gender stereotyping will occur because men and women are instrinscally different.
To pretend otherwise is do a disservice to the strengths of each gender that we should celebrate.
Men and women aren't that different. Many of the gender stereotypes are untrue, exaggerated to the extreme, or culturally enforced. They're also extremely harmful to both genders, like the idea the men are providers and women are nurturers hurts both genders a lot, since this makes it harder for men to reach a fair custody arrangement during a divorce and causes discrimination against women with children in the workplace.
It is no coincidence that Star Trek Voyager's ratings went up after Seven of Nine was introduced.
And that's crucial here: this game is trying to appeal to the broadest segment of its target market.
It needs to appeal because it needs to sell; that's the bottom line here, not a political statement.
I think the game is strong enough to not need to resort to blatant sexism to sell copies. Several of the mechanics are unique and fun, most of the rules are intuitive, the fights feel pretty epic, etc. I would honestly be surprised if there was anyone who would not have purchased this game if the female mages and creatures were actually wearing something more appropriate for combat.
Elves are effete, drink wine (or elderberry juice), often vegetarian, maybe eco-warriors, maybe logical (Vulcan)
Dwarves are gruff, quaff ale, sharpen axes, wear piercings and tattoos, honour death in battle (Viking, Klingon)
Goblins are short, cunning, back-stabbing, avaricious, hatch plots that backfire hence often comedic (Ferengi)
I cut out most of the above, since it just seemed to be more-or-less the same argument repeated a few times, but you're comparing stereotyping women and fantasy races here??? Stereotyping Elves, fantasy Dwarves, or Goblins doesn't hurt anyone in real life because none of those races are real.
I advise MW to appeal to more than Middle America's White Male Heterosexuals if they are to break new markets.
The first thing in your post I agree with.
The occasional humourous subversion of these cliche stereotypes would be great.
Everything is po-faced, even flavour text, that this lack of poking fun at itself makes depictions more dangerous.
We see this role-reversal in Pixar animation where the beautiful damsel rescues the prince (it's become cliche).
There is absolutely no such subversion in Mage Wars: it's so straightforwardly stereotypical, it's embarrassing.
Geeks are blessed with intelligence and frankly, some of it may condescend them.
...
Add humour so that any perceived sexism can be deflected as lacking a sense of humour.
Make it work both ways - yes, that does mean an armoured Xena and a Tarzan-like himbo.
Subvert stereotypes (carnivorous plants was a lost opportunity for humourous vegetarian diet flavour text).
Don't patronise fans: it's a complex game and its fans are proud of their intelligence so pander to it instead.
And...we're back to disagreeing again. That was unfortunately short-lived.
The "oh, this obviously sexist/racist/hetero-normative/etc thing is supposed to a joke!" argument is pretty bad. It doesn't change the fact that it's still sexist/racist/etc. and that still hurts people. Pretending something is supposed to be a joke doesn't give someone license to be bigoted. I'm frankly quite appalled that you would suggest that, especially after you've said that you belong to two minority groups.
To Arcane Wonders:
Please stop sexualizing the female mages and creatures, and please add more mages and creatures into the game that aren't white. Your game is a good one, but the (probably unintended) white male mage/creature is the default thing is pretty bad and makes it harder to appeal to women or racial minorities. You've already got an almost equal number of male and female mages, and if you continue that trend (adding in more racially diverse mages, some more [dressed!] female creatures, and some fan-service male mages you could probably make the gender and racial diversity a selling point. Some of the people I've recommended this game to have told me they don't want to give money to yet another company that treats female characters as fan-service for all the male players.
-
Oh Lord, save us from militant liberal do-gooders...
Aylin, as you keep highlighting my minorities, a card that I usually refuse play (my mistake for off-hand mentioning it), I can speak from personal experience that I cringe when I get defended by do-gooders who have no first hand experience, who believe in divisive policies like positive discrimination (why not pay compensation for slavery?) and celebrate ghetto-ising society, be it physically or within society, rather than integration. This constant highlighting of difference is the last thing that minorities want, acceptance not marginalisation.
It is laudable you feel so strongly about the objectification of women in our media (games is just another medium). I suspect measured advocates of a more balanced view (because men are shamelessly stripped naked in media far more than women) will not thank you for your half-read and carefully edited rant.
So if you wish to alienate more undecideds and do your cause more disservice, please continue to rant away. :)
-
In the words of my wife: I told you so. :-X
(I wounder how many other games have to deal with this......I honestly have never seen it before in all my 18 years of gamming. Cant we just go back to complaining that these games are evil???? Im starting to almost miss that. *No I am not...you see a pile of magic cards being burnt once in your life and you never look at society the same way again)
-
Everybody, we need to keep this as rant free as possible. I think this has been a good discussion, just keep everything civil. This is just a friendly reminder.
Also, I am reading this post ;) and Arcane Wonders is listening. Hopefully we'll be able to make something out of this.
-
Good to hear the team are listening, it would be great to have some downloadable alternative artwork to keep the game inclusive...
-
Thanks Darthdada for your ideas.
-
Yeah! ;D Your welcome!
I really do hope that some simple aesthetic changes might help you in getting them to play: and even tell them that its something that AW is taking very seriously. Because they are. It has been talked about-trust me.
And I can understand their feelings, but I hope that 4-8 cards wouldn't stop them from playing an amazing game such as magewars.
You really could use just about anything to represent your mage. That could be part of the fun for them to get into it. Just tell them that their allowed to do so. (Which, technically they are for home games)
-
Oh Lord, save us from militant liberal do-gooders...
As much as I'd love to make this discussion about me -- I admit to an unflattering vanity -- this is an important subject, and I think it's important not to make this kind of ad hominem argument. I am who I am, but it is my ideas you should be concerned with. They are right or wrong on their own merits, and are not any more right or wrong because of who I am or why I hold them.
But if we have to talk about people, I'd like to talk about my wife for a moment, because it is her ideas on this that have informed mine. Her degree is in art history, with an emphasis on costume and society. My degree is in graphic design and marketing, so we both took plenty of art history and critical theory, though she's far more equipped than I for any sort of rough-and-ready discussion of the history of gender, sexuality, attire, and illustration. We're both geeks, though her taste runs more to Jane Austin fanfic than high rules engagement board games.
Can you imagine what her reaction was to seeing the Joctari Beastmaster? I had difficulty convincing her that it was real. I can't imagine she'll ever be willing to give Mage Wars a try, and I can't really blame her. The embodied colonialism in that illustration is kind of staggering. Similarly, she loves the idea of Plants vs. Zombies, but any chance of hooking her interest with the Druid vs. Necromancer expansion was completely shot, as she recently reminded me, by the depiction of the Druid as a naked lady.
Now, understand that my wife is no prude. You can't be an art historian without confronting the vast history of naked ladies in Great Masters portraiture and sculpture. The so-called Venus of Willendorf is one of the oldest extant sculptures, and it's of a nude woman. And the Druid could have tied into that ancient tradition of earth-mother and been a fine archetypical spellcaster.
So by herself, the Druid might have been ok. Just like Fellella, by herself, could have been fine: she looks like Tinkerbell. And the Priestess, by herself, could have been fine (though with an outfit like that... worship of Asyra is probably not pg-13). Any one character, man or woman, can be ridiculous and porny, just like the Grey Angel is kinda doing a Fabio thing, and that's just fine. There's in-game, or in-world, or in-genre reasons for each of these characters individually to be sexy.
But when taken as a whole, my wife isn't interested in the in fiction justification, she wants to know why the art director on Earth chose this costume direction for all the women. Why did the chief of marketing define this product's target demographic in such a way that all this flesh and sex was a good idea?
In media criticism there is sometimes a distinction drawn between Watsonian and Doylist reasoning (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WatsonianVersusDoylist)(warning, TVtropes). The name comes from Sherlock Holmes. Why did Holmes do something dumb? Watson will say it was because Holmes was preoccupied with his broken violin; Sir Arthur Conan Doyle will say that perhaps it was because the Author wrote himself into a corner and needed to break out somehow, and main-character error is more believable than any other sort of plot saving coincidence.
So the Doylist explanation for this sexist pattern is really what she'd like to know. And since my degree is in Marketing, and she's moderately anti-capitalist, she's happy to rib me about it. Because, of course, the art direction in this kind of fantasy game drives away women. That may not be Arcane Wonders' specific intention, but the broader cultural "game geek" market is gender segregated on purpose (http://howtonotsuckatgamedesign.com/2013/12/marketers-fear-female-geek-2/), as discussed in this great summary by Anjin Anhut.
Geeks, generally, are a marketer's dream demographic. They have disposable income because they generally have more money, they're neophiles, so they'll naturally be drawn to whatever new product is being sold, and most importantly, they're (we're) clannish, and like to associate their identities with things like media properties (Star Trek vs Star Wars) and technology standards (Xbox vs PS). Geeks will dress up as your mascot and go to conventions. They will get tattoos of your logo. And when you have them all together in neatly defined categories (this is the important part) it is exceptionally easy to target them with effective advertising.
And, unfortunately, the gamer geek market has been shaped into an overwhelmingly male one, as described by Anhut above. When your market is defined as men, you can target their (assumed, stereotypical) libido, and this has two effects. It wins over some portion of the men in your market, and it drives off some portion of the women. This is, in fact, desirable, because it means that in the future your libidinous marketing will be even more effective, because you've increased the proportion of susceptible consumers in your marketing tranche. Your cake is smaller, but that's fine, you've excluded inefficient targets.
And this is one way to run your brand, either accidentally, or intentionally. It does work. It just has other problems. Aside from gnawing on your soul, it will turn your market base into a monoculture. Your product's customers will all become more and more similar, and if something bad happens that strikes a chord with some of them, you may lose them all. Like the Irish trying to live on Potatoes alone, a plague can spread through your entire market and obliterate your entire customer base. You can Jar-Jar your brand.
Corporate brands hedge against this catastrophe by diversifying their brand lines. Pepsi is for children, Diet Pepsi is for women, Caffeine free diet Pepsi is for old people. Mountain Dew is for teen boys. Diet Mountain Dew is for men who wish they were still teen boys. Etc.
Arcane Wonders doesn't have this option, yet. Partially that's ok. They (we) make a niche product anyway, and expanding into another niche is difficult, even if its an adjacent niche. But remember that gamers are neophiles. We love shiny new things. As the game matures, AW releases updates to keep the experience fresh and expand the line, but sooner or later, I propose, the game may regret driving away all those women. And liberal do-gooders.
-
I won't talk with complex words to try to make my statement look likes better or more important (when people talk about religion, politic or sexism they tend to do that).
But personally, I like my women fat (big boobs, big ass and big belly). So... When will we see a female mage having these caracteristiques?
Also, I do not see people complaining about the all very muscular-testosteroneful male mages that Beastmaster, Warlord, Warlock and Priest are. I want more ugly, nerdish male mage... Why it is always about the females and never about the males that people complain?
To finish, I think that all the goblins look like way too muh goblinish. They should be less stereotyped in my opinion.
-
Like the Irish trying to live on Potatoes alone, a plague can spread through your entire market and obliterate your entire customer base. You can Jar-Jar your brand.
+1 Banana Sticker for a Potato Famine Reference.
-
This has been talked about in thread form several times. The reason you can not find the threads is when when switched servers 2 or 3 times last year about 300 topics got lost in the move. I personaly lost about 175 posts.
I have spoke on this very topic at great length and had made stated my view clearly. I do not intend to reply on this further.
Like Laddin said as long as this continues in a civil manner I have no issues with allowing the discussion to happen but if it turns into a flame war or somebody tries to use it as a soapbox to force an idea onto others then we will no choice but to lock this thread.
-
Oh Lord, save us from militant liberal do-gooders...
That is uncalled for. Please keep it civil
-
I just did a huge search for the other threads and after looking over 136 pages of my personal posts all public threads on this topic are gone. :-\
I also could not find the evolution of the Banana sticker. :'(
-
Truly, dark days are upon us. :'(
-
I won't talk with complex words to try to make my statement look likes better or more important (when people talk about religion, politic or sexism they tend to do that).
But personally, I like my women fat (big boobs, big ass and big belly). So... When will we see a female mage having these caracteristiques?
Also, I do not see people complaining about the all very muscular-testosteroneful male mages that Beastmaster, Warlord, Warlock and Priest are. I want more ugly, nerdish male mage... Why it is always about the females and never about the males that people complain?
To finish, I think that all the goblins look like way too muh goblinish. They should be less stereotyped in my opinion.
^^ Absolutely brilliant satire! Why isn't there a Like button here?
Apologies for the delay in response. Friday night here in the UK, better things to do. That's why I had to rush out with just a cursory reply.
So I made what I felt was a balanced argument. Please re-read the 2 posts I wrote fully before attacking me in your righteous wrath.
I explained that Fantasy genre is male-centric.
No matter how hard Hollywood try to rewrite Tolkein, there were no female characters in The Hobbit and there were just 2 cameo support females in Lord of the Rings, Galadriel and Eowyn. Does that make Tolkien sexist? One can read alot of subtext into Tolkien (especially when the Fellowship, itself a male-centric word, is down to 2) but sexism is surely not one of them?
The fact is Fantasy uses European medieval society as a technological and cultural setting. And unfortunately, medieval society was just not that into its equal gender rights. Or racial integration. To have a female black crusader holding Jerusalem in Kingdom of Heaven would not work. Morgan Freemen as the token black "Syrian" (do people know what Syrians look like?) in Robin of Sherwood is tokenism. And tokenism is actually a damning admission that "this minority is so insecure that it wants to impose a revisionist history on us". Once you use the weight of political correctness to rewrite history (more so than conquerors did), we are on dangerous ground.
My post explained that Swords & Sorcery Fantasy (what I call Pulp Fantasy, as opposed to the more intellectual fantasy of Middle Earth with its deep history, geography, language and runes) is steeped in a tradition of sexism. I am damning about it, it's plain that I do not condone it. I call Conan sexist, a sign of its times.
Since then, we have seen the lot of females improve in Fantasy Literature. We have Hermione Granger as the most accomplished apprentice in the otherwise male-centric stories written by J K Rowling. We have Danaerys Targaryen, naive but principled. Though even Westeros, a cypher for Britain with its Wall and its Irish raiders, accepts that there no black faces beyond Jalabhar Xho, the exile from the Southern Isles "who is bedecked in a cape of fine feathers". And no, neither Xaro Xoan Daxos or Salador Sahn were black, that's just HBO's political correctness). Do we rise in anger that treacherous Braavos, with its a canals a cypher for the intrigue of Venice, is racist against Italians as it depicts them as treacherous, like condotieres of Machiavelli's time?
It's just a cypher!
Some images are loaded in our psyche. It is very hard to purge them. Fantasy writers will therefore leverage this in-built associations. Noble barbarian Wildings from the tundra. Mongol horde Dothraki riders. Treacherous bravos (it's a word) from Braavos. They are all just cyphers, used because they reinforce subconscious images, making them more believable hence acceptable to the reader.
What do people want?
Images that you just don't associate? That destroys the illusion. And in the end, Fantasy is just escapism. There is no Etheria where culturally women wore less clothes than men. A Female Elf Priestess of Asrya is as imaginary as a Male Elf. Aylin differentiates between the fantasy of the races and the reality of their gender. But it's the whole package! It's all imaginary!
When I asked AW to at least subvert their "embarrassingly straightforward stereotyping", was that me in any way complimenting them for the Jokhtari (which I bring up) or other PC faux pas that they have made? Yet Aylin thinks that subvert means "it's ok, it's a joke" rather than the cliche role reversal example I gave of the damsel rescuing the prince. Oh dear.
I think what really annoyed me was that anybody could see that I could understand why the fantasy gaming hobby is a pandering to these Fantasy genre literature tropes and more importantly, an intrinsic sexism within the geek demographic which is their target market. But despite this, I was pretty unequivocal in stating my feeling that MW had made some naive, non-malicious mistakes in their gender stereotyping.
It's all there in black and white, Aylin. I tried to stay neutral but in fact I was actually more critical towards MW. Yet you launched into a one-sided carefully edited out-of-context tirade about me.
People have only to compare your "it's wrong!" preachy hectoring to Kich's erudite response to appreciate that my comment about militant do-gooders was not aimed at Kich (sorry for your vanity) but at your attack on me. I have nothing but respect for Kich's position because he gave cogent arguments, not just the same old platitides and carefully edited misquotes that is weapon of militants and is actually so damaging to your cause.
I included many reasons why AW should change their art depiction. Yet Aylin, you chose to attack me because I tried to give a more balanced view instead of just a one-sided diatribe? Do you not believe in understanding both sides of a debate, to understand why the situation arisen in the first place? Or is your preference to censor any contrary views, bully them down with some perceived moral high ground?
If Mage Wars art depiction is hurting their product, they will change it. If they then create female dwarf bowmen and female elf crossbowmen, both fully clothed, and this jars with their fan base that sales fall, they will revert to more accepted stereotypes, hopefully still clothed.
In which fantasy trope does a mage, a spell-caster, don armour? I find this indignation slightly odd when it's the males like the armoured Warlock that is out-of-place with fantasy literature. So Mage Wars has created its own subgenre of Fantasy, where Paladins and Sirens are "mages". Well, if they released a female Paladin in just a plate mail bikini, I would be up in arms. But I would also be up in arms if they released a male Siren dressed in full plate mail. Because these are fantasy tropes. There is no sexism when the concept, dating back to before the Odyssey, is of an alluring female. The woman in the village who "enchanted" men with her beauty and was drowned as a witch was called an enchantress because of her beauty. How can you rewrite history just for some political correctness when this is what happened? Such revisionism is dangerous, nay seditious.
I was flabbergasted that I've been sanctioned for a flippant comment (aimed at "I don't want to hear any other argument" proselytisers like Aylin, not reasoned argument like Kich) when I actually gave a balanced view that veered on the same side as him and then got blatantly attacked by Aylin. I am so incensed that Arcane Wonders have again bowed to some sort of political correctness by focusing on me, above. I really couldn't care if this is my last post because I find this incredibly unfair and I'm utterly disillusioned.
It's getting late (3am here) and I'm tired trying to knock some sense into someone who is obviously so incensed that I could take a balanced view (yet still come down on the side of "it's a bit sexist, at least subvert it") that he can make this rabid attack whilst displaying the careful editing skills of a militant propagandist. I'll therefore end with a telling point that demonstrates Aylin's view that people are not equal. He makes a big deal that I should be ashamed of not standing up for women like a militant feminist because I'm from a minority. Well, what I ask Aylin is this: why should I be any special to someone not from a minority? The very fact that he constantly brings it up, amazed that a minority would not want special privileges, would like to stand on his/her own merits instead of trading in on some minority status, is an indictment that the special treatment attributed to minority views, an example of (to butcher Orwell) "all views are treated equally - but some views are more equal than others". You reveal your own prejudices by expressing your amazement. The world is more than just White Male Heterosexuals vs. the Rest of the Downtrodden Subjugated World, Aylin. If women are ruthless enough to get to the top of the corporate ladder like ruthless men, they will get there. If an intelligent black man with a muslim name deserves to be president of the USA, he will get there. It's a meritocracy we live in. And where a minority view is no more important than the silent majority view.
I feel I have been civil in my response but no doubt forum police will think otherwise. But I couldn't care less as this is just more kowtowing to political correctness when actually I have been more than critical of depictions in Mage Wars. Aylin attacks me, I respond with a visible sigh and I'm the villain? Hey, this will be shortest tenure as a Playtester (I made a splash behind the scenes) but the inequity of being singled out here was too much.
-
Oh Lord, save us from militant liberal do-gooders...
Uh... kay...?
Aylin, as you keep highlighting my minorities, a card that I usually refuse play (my mistake for off-hand mentioning it),
I mentioned it once, in a reply to the very post you stated it in. I apologize if this offended you; I won't mention them again.
I can speak from personal experience that I cringe when I get defended by do-gooders who have no first hand experience, who believe in divisive policies like positive discrimination (why not pay compensation for slavery?) and celebrate ghetto-ising society, be it physically or within society, rather than integration.
I haven't exactly made it a secret that I'm female.
What I would like to see is for them to stop sexually objectifying nearly every female creature or mage. I do not see any way doing that could detract from the game.
The other things you mentioned don't really have any bearing on this issue, so I'll leave those alone.
This constant highlighting of difference is the last thing that minorities want, acceptance not marginalisation.
You, from earlier in this very thread:
Gender stereotyping will occur because men and women are instrinscally different.
So right now I'm a little confused as to whether you want to highlight differences or not.
Regardless, you are right; most people in a minority group would prefer not to be marginalized. As such I would prefer it if an otherwise great game would stop doing that (depiction of almost all females as eye candy, non-whites as barbarians).
It is laudable you feel so strongly about the objectification of women in our media (games is just another medium). I suspect measured advocates of a more balanced view (because men are shamelessly stripped naked in media far more than women) will not thank you for your half-read and carefully edited rant.
Whether or not the above is true, we're talking about Mage Wars specifically. As I said before, one instance of bigotry against a group doesn't make another instance of bigotry (to either the same or a different group) ok.
So if you wish to alienate more undecideds and do your cause more disservice, please continue to rant away. :)
Could you please enlighten me as to which definition of 'rant' you are using? The only ones I've been able to find specify "violent, angry, or extravagant writing or speech", though honestly I was more shocked than anything else at the time.
-
...well then. I won't say much aside from clarifying a few of the things I said which seem to have been misinterpreted.
When I asked AW to at least subvert their "embarrassingly straightforward stereotyping", was that me in any way complimenting them for the Jokhtari (which I bring up) or other PC faux pas that they have made? Yet Aylin thinks that subvert means "it's ok, it's a joke" rather than the cliche role reversal example I gave of the damsel rescuing the prince. Oh dear.
I was actually referring to this sentence: Add humour so that any perceived sexism can be deflected as lacking a sense of humour.
The...part where you straight-up suggest that they do that.
I left the rest of your paragraphs in (aside from the one I removed with ellipses) since I didn't want to take that sentence out of context.
It's all there in black and white, Aylin. I tried to stay neutral but in fact I was actually more critical towards MW. Yet you launched into a one-sided carefully edited out-of-context tirade about me.
I wasn't attacking you. I was appalled that you suggested it was ok for people to discriminate against minority group for various reasons.
And carefully edited? I took out a few paragraphs so as not to make my post unreasonably long. Which parts do you feel I unfairly represented what you said? I will go back and edit my post to include any parts of yours that you feel should be there.
People have only to compare your "it's wrong!" preachy hectoring to Kich's erudite response to appreciate that my comment about militant do-gooders was not aimed at Kich (sorry for your vanity) but at your attack on me. I have nothing but respect for Kich's position because he gave cogent arguments, not just the same old platitides and carefully edited misquotes that is weapon of militants and is actually so damaging to your cause.
I included many reasons why AW should change their art depiction. Yet Aylin, you chose to attack me because I tried to give a more balanced view instead of just a one-sided diatribe? Do you not believe in understanding both sides of a debate, to understand why the situation arisen in the first place? Or is your preference to censor any contrary views, bully them down with some perceived moral high ground?
I've tried to be respectful to you in this thread. If I have failed in this, I apologize.
There is no sexism when the concept, dating back to before the Odyssey, is of an alluring female. The woman in the village who "enchanted" men with her beauty and was drowned as a witch was called an enchantress because of her beauty. How can you rewrite history just for some political correctness when this is what happened? Such revisionism is dangerous, nay seditious.
I'm going to state right now that I removed part of this paragraph and the two just above it.
However, age of a trope doesn't make it less sexist. Moving on from that, if they released a scantily-clad female siren (with the other females properly clothed) I wouldn't have a problem with it, especially if they later released a scantily-clad male siren. My issue is that every currently released female mage is wearing ridiculous clothing, and almost all of the (few) female creatures are as well.
I was flabbergasted that I've been sanctioned for a flippant comment (aimed at "I don't want to hear any other argument" proselytisers like Aylin, not reasoned argument like Kich) when I actually gave a balanced view that veered on the same side as him and then got blatantly attacked by Aylin. I am so incensed that Arcane Wonders have again bowed to some sort of political correctness by focusing on me, above. I really couldn't care if this is my last post because I find this incredibly unfair and I'm utterly disillusioned.
It's getting late (3am here) and I'm tired trying to knock some sense into someone who is obviously so incensed that I could take a balanced view (yet still come down on the side of "it's a bit sexist, at least subvert it") that he can make this rabid attack whilst displaying the careful editing skills of a militant propagandist. I'll therefore end with a telling point that demonstrates Aylin's view that people are not equal. He makes a big deal that I should be ashamed of not standing up for women like a militant feminist because I'm from a minority. Well, what I ask Aylin is this: why should I be any special to someone not from a minority? The very fact that he constantly brings it up, amazed that a minority would not want special privileges, would like to stand on his/her own merits instead of trading in on some minority status, is an indictment that the special treatment attributed to minority views, an example of (to butcher Orwell) "all views are treated equally - but some views are more equal than others". You reveal your own prejudices by expressing your amazement. The world is more than just White Male Heterosexuals vs. the Rest of the Downtrodden Subjugated World, Aylin. If women are ruthless enough to get to the top of the corporate ladder like ruthless men, they will get there. If an intelligent black man with a muslim name deserves to be president of the USA, he will get there. It's a meritocracy we live in. And where a minority view is no more important than the silent majority view.
1. I was shocked that someone who claims to be in a minority group would give the go-ahead to discriminate against another minority group.
2. I was unaware that mentioning something in one post constituted "constantly bringing it up". Though I did mention it in my last post (to apologize for offending you) and here (to clarify my original position), but in both of those cases you brought it up first...
3. I was also unaware that asking to not be discriminated against, blatantly or otherwise, was a "special privilege".
4. "Special treatment of minority views"??? I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. About the only thing that would apply would be to...ask people in a minority group if X is offensive to them or how Y affects them? Just...what?
I also took out a paragraph at the end with my amazing editing skills.
-
While traditionally sirens are female, that's probably because most sailors who told stories about sirens were male.
Also, all dwarves LOOK male, but there are female dwarves. Maybe all sirens look female, but some of them are men.
Also, traditional fantasy tropes aren't God. There are lots of fantasy stories where women are equal to men. While the real life time period upon which much of the fantasy genre is derived from did not have that much gender equality, it also didn't have mages or any magic at all. That's why it's FANTASY and not HISTORICAL FICTION.
And fantasy isn't always medieval. There's also fantasy based on colonial times, Ancient Rome, ancient China, and a lot of other cultures and time periods. Medieval fantasy just happens to be the most common.
I dare you to try to invent a fantasy trope that doesn't already exist. Or any trope for that matter. Using and combining preexisting tropes in novel ways is what makes a good writer. Readers like to be surprised. If story and characters are too predictable, they're boring. While I don't like it, a mild amount of sexism is probably tolerable, as long as that sexism is directed at both sexes and is lampshaded by greater gender diversity.
On a related note, I personally think it's a good idea thematically for certain mage class's to be more likely to have alternate genders and sexes. A shapeshifter could be a gender fluid hermaphrodite. A Sympath could be a pan-gender man or woman. An illusionist could be an agendered man or woman. I feel like these genders and sexes would be very fitting.
The illusionst being of the male or female sex while not having a gender can be very deceptive to most people. They try to classify the mage one way and they don't realize they're wrong and can't classify him until it's too late.
A Sympath would be great as a pan-gendered mage because of great flexibility that would allow him/her to use copy mechanics. Since sympathetic magic is based on imitation and correspondence, and one of the best ways to facilitate correspondence with everyone they meet is by having all their genders.
And a gender-fluid shapeshifter? That's kind of self explanatory I think.
Pangender: all genders
Gender-fluid: constantly changing gender
Agendered: No gender. Not to be confused with Gender-neutrality, which is a gender.
-
I won't talk with complex words to try to make my statement look likes better or more important (when people talk about religion, politic or sexism they tend to do that).
Politics nothing! I do that when I'm ordering at a restaurant or taking idly about the weather! :D
And your point is well founded: I've been using a lot of theory when what we need is more practice. Trotsky had a simple, practical, request that I kinda hijacked so I could grind my axe. My bad.
So, in the spirit of my new year's resolution to never talk about a problem without talking also about its solution, how could this work? A set of alternate art promos for all the mages? Maybe foil stamped?
Would people buy a set of those for all 10 (soon to be 12 or 14) mages if it were available, lavishly illustrated, and happened to include revised, appropriately badass women of Mage Wars in full battle array? I'm imagining someone like Spike (of Templar Arizona) illustrating the Druid, or Noel Stevenson (of Nimona) illustrating the Joctari Beastmaster. (I say "someone like" because I don't know if either of them take commissions for illustrations. Probably not, in fact.)
-
Most minis games allow people to paint their figures. Wouldn't it be cool if we could have cards on which we could draw our own unique mage art? Or even a program that allows us to use different templates to customize our mage's appearance.
We could even have mage art contests during organized play! That would be cool.
-
While traditionally sirens are female, that's probably because most sailors who told stories about sirens were male.
Also, all dwarves LOOK male, but there are female dwarves. Maybe all sirens look female, but some of them are men.
Also, traditional fantasy tropes aren't God. There are lots of fantasy stories where women are equal to men. While the real life time period upon which much of the fantasy genre is derived from did not have that much gender equality, it also didn't have mages or any magic at all. That's why it's FANTASY and not HISTORICAL FICTION.
And fantasy isn't always medieval. There's also fantasy based on colonial times, Ancient Rome, ancient China, and a lot of other cultures and time periods. Medieval fantasy just happens to be the most common.
I dare you to try to invent a fantasy trope that doesn't already exist. Or any trope for that matter. Using and combining preexisting tropes in novel ways is what makes a good writer. Readers like to be surprised. If story and characters are too predictable, they're boring. While I don't like it, a mild amount of sexism is probably tolerable, as long as that sexism is directed at both sexes and is lampshaded by greater gender diversity.
On a related note, I personally think it's a good idea thematically for certain mage class's to be more likely to have alternate genders and sexes. A shapeshifter could be a gender fluid hermaphrodite. A Sympath could be a pan-gender man or woman. An illusionist could be an agendered man or woman. I feel like these genders and sexes would be very fitting.
The illusionst being of the male or female sex while not having a gender can be very deceptive to most people. They try to classify the mage one way and they don't realize they're wrong and can't classify him until it's too late.
A Sympath would be great as a pan-gendered mage because of great flexibility that would allow him/her to use copy mechanics. Since sympathetic magic is based on imitation and correspondence, and one of the best ways to facilitate correspondence with everyone they meet is by having all their genders.
And a gender-fluid shapeshifter? That's kind of self explanatory I think.
Pangender: all genders
Gender-fluid: constantly changing gender
Agendered: No gender. Not to be confused with Gender-neutrality, which is a gender.
I just wanted to +1 this post.
I'm not sure what in-game effects it would have, but some non-standard gender presentation would be nice.
Ringkichard:
The set would need to be available to everyone (not just those that go to specific events - my main dislike of promos). They could package it with the errata-ed cards, extra tokens (especially the damage and mana ones), and possibly extra copies of Bloodreaper/Holy Avenger/Treebond/etc (sometimes these get lost...and it would suck to have to purchase the expansion over again for one token). Not only would this get everyone who doesn't want to a half-dressed mage, a lot of people would probably also like the extra tokens and physical copies of the updated Temples and Battle Fury and might buy it just for that. They'd get to make more money and spin it as doing the right thing, which should hopefully make everyone happy.
As long as they made an effort to not sexualize the mages/creatures in future expansions I think it would pretty much solve that issue.
-
I have been weaving in and out of this thread- mostly due (to the inevitable) off topic discussion (And whatever you want to call it) but.....
Yeah- there are some great ideas- Mage Wars could be the first game to ever let the players have their own personal mage cards! (Looked over by judges obviously, so that nothing is Overly Offencive.
Saying that: Im fine with how it is. You can be unhappy, he can be unhappy, she can be unhappy.....He-She can be unhappy.......I dont care. Its just a card. I dont expect anyone to make everyone happy. And it would be impossible to do so. I wont even get into the semantics of what that would entail- but know I am thinking about it. (And I dont want to argue about it)
(I just keep posting since I like some of the ideas out of here)
-
Firstly, on topic: yes, a "PC Booster Pack" of new image cards, available at retailers who sell Mage Wars at cost + distribution + retailer mark-up, would be a great idea. Although I doubt it will sell well enough to interest physical retailers so it will probably have to be sold at the online store for the US market. So well done, Trotsky, for putting this out there.
Now to the more interesting (for me) linked topic, the depiction of women in geek culture, which Kich hijacked this thread which then prompted me to write a polemic (it was dead at work) explaining why it happens (not excusing it), trying to diffuse the gravity of this "sin" (it's just another imaginary world with no bearing to reality, get a life!) but also sympathetic to the feminist view that these fantasy depictions objectify and subjugate women in real life.
Kich's reply deserves its own reply. And this is not it. There is alot I'd like to discuss with him, like conventions in depicting the female form in classical art (both clothed and nude), the deification of the female form (and not just the child-bearing hips Gaia sculpture I think he references) or the absurdity of the female breastplate (let alone the plate mail bras traditionally worn by Valkyrie in Wagnerian opera) because armour designed for women just did not exist (Joan of Arc was a flat-chested tomboy). These are all worthy intellectual discussions but frankly, I need to do some research before crossing swords with Kich's intimidating intellect and knowledge on this topic.
Although, as a fellow Marketing graduate, I am surprised he's applying Portfolio Marketing principles to a Niche Category like Mage Wars. I'm sorry, Rich, but the Irish Potato Famine just has no bearing on this topic. The main threat to Mage Wars is not some gestalt hatred towards it by their similarly-minded target market because of some future faux pas, a zeitgeist backlash resulting in a boycott. The main Marketing threats to Mage Wars are:
(a) becoming staid - you are spot on about neophilia - but combating this creates its own problems (see below)
(b) being supplanted by a more streamlined version with holistic vision (defined school traits, necrotic, sonic etc)
(c) being supplanted by an inferior version with better distribution and/or marketing (VHS vs. superior Betamax)
(d) the LCG issue of increasing barrier to entry with every expansion (especially if expansions are cross-school).
(e) technology, not creating a tablet-friendly interface that the competition already do better (I can name a few)
Those are the real Marketing Threats here (my SWOT analysis) so let's not muddy the water by alarmist what-if scenarios of geek culture suddenly expressing their feminist solidarity due to a plague-ridden potato/card. Geek culture, propagated by the media and merchandise that panders to it, is sadly (I'm not happy with it) a mirror of the prejudices of that peer group. If we are talking about clothing Planeswalkers in Magic, a far more prevalent game which may influence society (but who are we kidding?), then maybe this issue would be more important.
But this is a niche game within a niche segment of society! As a vocal critic of AW in many areas, I've grown to admire this small Dallas-based indie games company for staying true to the principle of Freedom Of Speech on their forum and the polite restraint (biting their tongues until they bleed) in their replies. If they were based in Mecca, the women will all be wearing a hijab! I always viewed Mage Wars art as just the local cultural norm thus my advice to them was to be more sophisticated in its depictions to appeal to broader markets. Feminists think female Islamic dress subjugates women as chattel yet scantily clad images exploit women. I guess that leaves just dungarees... (Oh dear, scientists have proved sense of humour and feminism exhibit an inverse correlation.)
No, this isn't a rebuttal of Kich's erudite well-reasoned arguments (even if the Potato Famine allegory was skilled sophistry). Rather, this post is aimed at Aylin and others who share her idealism (see, I added a positive tone).
Firstly, no Aylin, I didn't know you were a woman but forgive me if I say that it didn't surprise me (and I suspect I'm not alone). Does that make me guilty of stereotyping? Most definitely. We all are. Stereotypes exist because they are commonplace in that segment. Maybe it was the way that in 3 incensed sequential posts, you launched into attacking Laddin for defending the Forcemaster, Imaginator for asking for less heated debate and then me, who was actually sympathetic to your viewpoint (explicit in my preceding posts on page 1), attacking me purely because I dared to give reasons why sexism exists in geek culture and then instead of hitting AW over the head with a "it's wrong! it''s wrong! it's wrong!" rant, I gave them sound marketing reasons why they should change their female art depiction (a sales incentive, not a moral reason that has little commercial value considering their target segment is broadly in line with their art). Because I don't exhibit the tunnel vision of a militant but tried to diagnose why this happened before giving a prognosis then prescribing a course of action that appeals to their commercial acumen, this "work within the system" approach was obviously abhorrent to you, Aylin, and in your righteous wrath, you lashed out and turned a Sympathiser into an Enemy. And this is a common occurrence with militants, they do their cause harm with their alienating militancy. So, no I wasn't surprised that you're a woman.
I have unfair preconceptions you're young and precocious because of your former sobriquet, "AylinIsAwesome", so I'm mindful that I need to don kid gloves here. I think we all have preconceptions that some posters, even on this thread, are quite young (yet visibly talented in many ways), and that is why some of the sillier suggestions are not harshly put down. Well, sadly there is no need to don kid gloves with me, I give as good as I get and my only issue so far is that I was personally attacked to which I made a flip exasperated comment that is in no way insulting (and reflected my change of position from sympathetic to hostile), certainly not aimed at Kich who had not replied prior yet quoted it to support his rhetoric - and I was singled out for sanctioning by forum admin! This to me is symptomatic of the positive discrimination that is rife in society, the "we better go out of our way to side with the minority else we'll be accused of some ism/phobia/normative suffix". And so the silent majority (barring Wildhorn's satire) are just kowtowed into following a militant agenda. Self-censorship is seditious. Freedom of speech works both ways.
I did refer to you Aylin, as a "he" and I apologise if this offended you but I was simply playing probabilities there. I note many rulebooks these days have a disclaimer that the use of the male pronoun in their rules text (written like legal contracts for precision) is not in any way meant to denigrate or subjugate women etc. When did simple convenient conventions in our language become a political statement that we need to worry about "Hu-person" and "Person-kind" in case we offend a vocal feminist minority? I find it sad that games books have to add this disclaimer. Perhaps language will end up with a de-humanising "it" (which is pangender/transgender/agender or whatever it is) instead of the default "he". Be assured that now I know your gender, Aylin, I will not repeat the mistake.
Now I find myself at a quandary. I was brought up to be chivalrous towards women, to open doors for them, offer to carry their groceries and give up my seat on public transport for them. That's just the old-fashioned way that I was brought up. Yet living in London for most of my life except for the last 7 years, I've had so many bad experiences following those principles, angry women scolding me and in one case even hitting me ("never hit a woman" is one principle I will never break) because I dared to condescend them that now, due to those militant feminists, I don't follow those principles anymore. Yet I feel sad that the world has lost that sense of chivalry. So apologies if my reply here lacks chivalry, Aylin, but you can blame your sisters for that.
The reason I'm posting here is because of what happened last night. It has relevance, Aylin, so please bear with me.
I live in Brighton, UK, a smaller-scale San Francisco of England (replete with hills), a den of left wing hippies and liberal "weirdos" in a county/state that is mainly right wing (I believe Seattle and San Antonio are similar?). Yes, both me and my friends are liberals - but most of us are not militant liberals, we live in the real world built upon unsavoury compromises, where change is achieved in small increments (my anarchist friends will disagree here).
So there was I at a games-playing friend's Birthday Party (he also owns Mage Wars). Almost all the blokes there were hardcore games geeks plus girlfriends (Brighton modernists don't marry), some of whom play games. Some of us ended up in a room playing "Spartacus: A Game of Blood of Treachery", a game I can safely mention here as it is multi-player (so not a competitor for Mage Wars) and its arena duels (where players bet on and influence with intrigue cards) can be used as an entry for the far more sophisticated Mage Wars. Anyway, it's a fun game with simple clever mechanics but it's based on probably the most politically incorrect TV series ever, gloriously so that it achieves self-parody status. It's best played with bottles of JD and trying to insert pig-Latin into your roleplaying as one of the conniving Houses. Here's a link to it on BGG.
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/128671/spartacus-a-game-of-blood-treachery
The winner was a good friend, a girl (she fluttered her eyelashes with the weaker-willed drunker players to win it) and at the end, she commented that it was great to play a game where there is so much hunky almost naked male flesh while all the mostly female Slave assets were clothed ((I had gone down the brothel strategy minting money like Littlefinger). Only then did it hit the rest of us just how homoerotic the game is with all its near-naked male flesh yet all the women are clothed (no doubt, to prevent uproar from feminists). But any such imbalance is perfectly fine in society these days.
Of course this was less than a day since my prior post so, the game having just finished, we got to discussing this double standards in society. How it's perfectly fine to have Diet Coke and similar ads that leer at hunky men but nobody dares the opposite. How HBO, with its excellent shows, insist on inserting unnecessary sex scenes which are not essential to the story (Littlefinger's brothel had little part in the story, HBO!) but are clever in that they include full frontal male nudity as well to deflect the ire of feminists. This led on to "Oz", one of HBO's early hits, based in a male prison with only male nudity and we all agreed they could never ever do that show based in a woman's prison. The homosexuality and rape depicted in Oz would have been deemed exploitative were it based in a woman's prison. Double standards.
There were areas where we were divided. Some of us thought Sin City was exploitative. These were those who had not read the comics I guess. Now I don't agree with Frank Miller's politics (I'm more an Alan Moore left wing hippy) but I was one of those who argued Sin City is not reality, it's a stylistic piece that harks back to a simpler world of brutal chivalry, and as such should not be taken seriously. It's art so can get away with it as it appeals to a more sophisticated palate like the plentiful female nudes in art. Also that the final act (The Big Fat Kill) even empowers women, who are depicted as far more dangerous than the bumbling men. But I have to confess that the room (we had moved to the living room so many there) was split over Sin City. Hey, Brighton is left wing and some of the hate was probably aimed at Miller.
I then got onto the recent Mage Wars debate and because not all of us played, we got out the host's the copy. There was consensus that the art style is retro therefore the viewer has to accept retro sensibilities in keeping with that style. Nobody was particularly offended but the common consensus was that AW should "play it safe" (a horrible admission of the bullying power of vocal militant feminists) by adding a few scantily clad men and few fully clothed women.
The animator among us explained that the reason women are often caricatured with ample bosoms, hourglass figures and naked thighs is so that classic femininity can be accentuated and they are immediately recognised as female. His theory is linked to my Fantasy Sees Things In Black And White theory. Unless the concept is meant to be deliberately asexual (say an Odo-like changeling), Fantasy does not do androgyny well. We only have to see the horrible snide comments made about Lucy Lawless as Xena to see it (as for an effeminate male...). Fantasy is exactly what it says on the tin: a fantasy where the men are muscled and the women are classically feminine.
Passing around some of the cards through the mixed gender audience, only the Priestess really drew negative comments, but this was because she was meant to be Holy, implied Lawful Good, and such immodest depiction is not in line with such religious beliefs, especially when contrasted to the Priest. Everybody liked the Red Sonja style armoured angels that are Guardian Angel, Samandriel, Selesius and Valshalla (as the latter's tiny depiction and elemental feel excused being the least clothed), even when I contrasted them to the toga-robed male Gray Angel (who one person felt gave him a martyr-like appearance, not even knowing the game mechanic). Being Brighton with its liberal attitudes to sexuality, everybody loved the Forcemaster as a "bad-ass" girl. The host did not have the Druid set and, worried I would kill the conversation dead, the last card I handed around was the Jokhtari Beastmaster...
Now I've stated (before Aylin attacked me) that, while coloured myself and I'm not in the least bit offended, I felt AW opened themselves up to criticism with the female black savage image facing the white colonialist. But what I hadn't considered is: "how else are you supposed to put a fantasy spin on something that actually happened in history?". The alternative would be to never accept that this happened and that atrocities were committed in the name of crusading Catholicism - and such denial is worse, not far from Holocaust denial. This was argued by a female games player who's quite an activist (Brighton voted the UK's only Green Party member in Parliament) though we joked that she only supported the card because most of her girlfriends are black. However, it does bring up a valid point: should Arcane Wonders be applauded for bravely transposing Fantasy to a milieu that doesn't flatter the white oppressors, armed with their "Holy" light that burns? Is the Holy of Etheria similar to the ultra Lawful edicts of the Vorgons in Babylon 5, so law-imposing that it becomes fascist? Having been exposed to this alternate view, I'm starting to see hidden depth between Malakai's Fire and Demonic Fire.
I still think Mage Wars should have played it safe on the race front. Maybe made Forcemaster oriental without being accused of being racist by promoting that racial stereotype (it's difficult to potray a race in a card without caricaturising it). Maybe made Sir Corazin or one of the Angels black. But actually, if you think about it, exploring the wrongness of crusading colonialism under the pretext of a fantasy, was actually quite brave. They could have played it safe and just stuck to European Temperate Zone Medieval creatures and structures. But instead they took a risk (just like with the Necromancer book) and provoked a debate on it
I can tell you that the night, fuelled by alcohol etc, meandered onto other weighty linked topics. But I ended the night with these thoughts.
1. There is a lot of double standards in current society, pushed upon us by a vocal militant minority agenda.
2. Art depiction, especially in a small card, needs to accentuate features and this caricature may cause offence.
3. It is better to provoke discussion than censor it and deny contrary opinions exist or the past never occurred.
As for what you wrote, Aylin, I've written too much already and can't be bothered to rebut it (I'd rather test my wits against Kich) because I doubt anyone can change your views so all you achieved by blindly attacking me is to alienate a blatant sympathiser (and probably others). I know I am in no way out of synch with my own liberal peers, it is you who is the extremist. I will however end with just one quote.
I was shocked that someone who claims to be in a minority group would give the go-ahead to discriminate against another minority group.
This is typical militant hyperbole which is self-defeating when revealed to be fraudulent. I have never advocated discriminating against women (I believe the UK's recent Paternity Rights Bill will help to remove the Glass Ceiling that exists for careerist women because it makes men just as much a liability with their new Paternity Rights as women, the reason for inequity in the workplace). Not finding an image offensive is not discrimination, madam. And I also do not consider women to be a "minority group".
-
Deckbuilder,
That's not what your earlier post sounded like to me the first time I read it. It sounded like an angry sexist rant. It was way too long and full of irritated/frustrated language to be perceived as much else, especially late at night and in the context it was posted in. I somewhat suspected that you had miscommunicated, and it seems like I was right.
I've done the same thing many times, where I write a really long essay-post and a few points color everyone's perception of what I wrote. It happens because the brain is constantly trying to predict what's about to be said. Or at least last time I listened to a Science Friday story on NPR about it that's what I remember hearing.
And I suppose it's not super important right now in this conversation, but I do feel like pointing out that sex, gender and sexuality are three different things. A person can be agendered and still be of the male or female sex, and they can be homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, etc.
And Aylin, Deckbuilder might have seemed to say otherwise, but nobody here said that bigotry or prejudice is good. That being said, prejudices are attitudes and beliefs, and people don't exactly choose what they believe.
The whole concept of male chivalry is often condescending and very insulting to women, yes, but it is also well-intentioned.
It is similar to how people with disabilities are treated. To use a somewhat extreme example, when someone grabs the handles of a wheelchair user and starts steering them around, the person steering doesn't think of it as assault, like if someone grabbed their legs and started steering them around. They honestly believe they're being helpful. There is currently a disabled persons civil rights movement in full swing right now, and well-intentioned injustice and discrimination is IMO, possibly one of the biggest obstacles it faces.
But I don't expect a disabled mage or creature to make an appearance any time soon, and I don't feel any reason to be terribly offended by it, and I certainly don't consider it discrimination. It's just a game after all.
However, I do think some hindering traits could work quite well for balancing some future mages, and could be fun to use while also adding more depth and flavor to the game. I imagine an elderly seer with the lumbering trait, or a metal smith mage with extremely low life that uses Construct conjurations that attach to themself and can intercept attacks aimed at them. Or even a bulky lumbering mountain giant mage that has the number of spells they can prepare each round reduced by one, and occupies two adjacent zones at all times.
Or if you want to get really interesting, an extra-dimensional mage with an ability similar to ACG's "Blink", who has to pay mana in order to move normally—sort of a magical Parkinson's disease, if you will.
And there's no reason to use "it" when singular-they has been commonly used for centuries. It's only relatively recently in history that a bunch of very sexist grammar nazis got together and banned its use.
I still think it would be awesome if we could make our own mage art. It might also be a good way to get more people to invest in mage wars. Since this isn't a TCG, there aren't bunches of vendors making a profit off of buying and selling mage wars cards. However, if there were people buying blank mage cards, painting mage artwork on them and then selling them... that would be amazing. You could even make Mage Wars card sleeves with different frame designs painted on the clear side, so that mage artwork can be framed.
Not to mention that blank cards are amazing for alternate variants and home brews.
The possibilities are making me drool...
-
Imaginator.
You call my post a rant for discussing Frazetta and other Fantasy heritage in an intellectual manner?
But Aylin's hectoring, preachy holier-than-thou "you're wrong because you're wrong" tirade was not a rant?
At last, someone with a sense of irony - oh you have a wicked sense of humour!
You say it was too long but would you attack a book before reading the twist in the second half?
I assume Aylin read the whole of my preceding posts before she launched her attack on me?
However...
I advise MW to appeal to more than Middle America's White Male Heterosexuals if they are to break new markets.
The occasional humourous subversion of these cliche stereotypes would be great.
Everything is po-faced, even flavour text, that this lack of poking fun at itself makes depictions more dangerous.
We see this role-reversal in Pixar animation where the beautiful damsel rescues the prince (it's become cliche).
There is absolutely no such subversion in Mage Wars: it's so straightforwardly stereotypical, it's embarrassing.
Geeks are blessed with intelligence and frankly, some of it may condescend them.
I would bet that MW sales per capita in Middle America are better than the Coasts.
I know politically America has become 2 countries but is it also the same culturally?
Here in the UK (and I bet our German posters may agree), sexism is a major issue.
MW can play the "oh it's so delightfully retro chic it's avant garde" card only for so long.
It really needs to break out of its anachronisms if it wants to appeal to other societies.
So my position on Mage Wars art depiction of females is that it needs to step up a gear.
Add humour so that any perceived sexism can be deflected as lacking a sense of humour.
Make it work both ways - yes, that does mean an armoured Xena and a Tarzan-like himbo.
Subvert stereotypes (carnivorous plants was a lost opportunity for humourous vegetarian diet flavour text).
Don't patronise fans: it's a complex game and its fans are proud of their intelligence so pander to it instead.
In short, please be more subtle with your female depictions?
Because currently there may be US Coastal and European markets that view its retro art as anachronistic.
Retro is a fashion with no longevity unless tongue-in-cheek.
My grandmother uses racist language; I think many grandparents do and we accept it as generation culture.
When I look at Mage Wars art, I view it as Middle America, still stuck in Frazetta's scantily clad nubile women.
Just like my grandmother with her racist language, no malice is intended, it's just a culturally associated trope.
That's why I am less stressed than Kich on this - I just hope a more international perspective is adopted soon.
If that was me pussy-footing trying to get change through reason, to ask for small changes not earth-shaking differences that jar with existing artwork, and certainly not calling Arcane Wonders sexist bigots like she does on their forum (what incredible chutzpah!), I then go on to make my position crystal clear (this before she made her three pronged attack on 3 posters).
Yes, she is an awesome-looking clothed female Jedi/Sith Lord, proof that you don't need to keep them in bikinis.
However, would it be unfair to say that this isn't always the case?
I don't have the cards but is Samandriel (most powerful female creature) in a bikini like Jokhtari and Priestess?
This is so dangerous posting at work without the cards but I'm sure I'd subconsciously spotted a subtext here.
Women in Etheria prefer to sunbathe, not shop (oh dear, I'm gonna get clobbered by the PC brigade for that).
As Kich said elsewhere about a male and female of a new race: "he's dressed for the streets. she's dressed for the sheets".
Hey, this isn't my battle, it's Kich's: I just understand both views (you know what sitting on the fence gives you).
I'm personally fine with the art but the marketer in me thinks you should tone it down - or better still subvert it.
Imagine a female posing like in Michaelangelo's Thinker?
Or a male emerging from a shell like in Botticelli's Venus?
Ok, both too cultural as in-jokes but I'm sure there are US archetypes you can subvert.
It would just help to knowingly poke fun at fantasy tropes.
A bearded Dwarf Dowager berserker, with female breastplate, would solve that age old mystery...
It's really difficult because if you take a risk (like the Necromancer book which I love), you'll offend some people.
But if you don't take risks, you become stale and cliche to your "seen it all before" jaded market.
All I am proposing is a bit more humour, subverting what we fantasy fans expect - but in a way that doesn't jar.
Hey, I'm personally fine with your art (Nightshade Lotus is an incredibly beautiful masterpiece).
I just think you could alienate unexplored markets so should make Etheria feel less old-fashion.
So far the only non-white face is a savage barbarian shaman (female so scantily clad) who resists the colonising crusaders.
I'm not offended by it at all (in fact, I've said Kumanjaro is seeped in thematic strength).
But you can see how that sole depiction could be viewed, a very white colonial mindset.
All we're missing is a mincing elf bard and his spikey-haired warrior-maiden bodyguard and we'll have a full set!
The bottom line is this: if the roles were reversed and I had attacked her like she attacked me (just go read her one-sided carefully edited rant again, just after she attacked you and Laddin, oh she was on a roll), if I attacked her in a similar fashion, do you think I would be still allowed on this forum?
But that's just her militancy, it's understandable. What I take issue with is she attacked me for giving a balanced view and it was me who got taken to task for an exasperated comment (I'm not even religious, we're mostly agnostic here in godless Britain). I know Kich mischievously sandwiched his post with references to my comment that was obviously not aimed at him (as he had not made any intervening comments) and that this was taken to mean it was offensive in some way. Well done, Kich, for selling them a feigned insult that could never have been aimed at you. Still, it was me who was singled out for sanctioning, symptomatic of default positive discrimination when dealing with minority activists (feminists are a minority, women are not), afraid of being tarred as bigoted. And such knee jerk reactions are dangerous!
Freedom of speech works both ways. Except when it doesn't. "All view are equal. But some are more equal than others."
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTLwiccIOxI
How about we all enjoy this song that makes me think of Shad0w.
-
Imaginator.
You call my post a rant for discussing Frazetta and other Fantasy heritage in an intellectual manner?
But Aylin's hectoring, preachy holier-than-thou "you're wrong because you're wrong" tirade was not a rant?
At last, someone with a sense of irony - oh you have a wicked sense of humour!
You say it was too long but would you attack a book before reading the twist in the second half?
I assume Aylin read the whole of my preceding posts before she launched her attack on me?
However...
I advise MW to appeal to more than Middle America's White Male Heterosexuals if they are to break new markets.
The occasional humourous subversion of these cliche stereotypes would be great.
Everything is po-faced, even flavour text, that this lack of poking fun at itself makes depictions more dangerous.
We see this role-reversal in Pixar animation where the beautiful damsel rescues the prince (it's become cliche).
There is absolutely no such subversion in Mage Wars: it's so straightforwardly stereotypical, it's embarrassing.
Geeks are blessed with intelligence and frankly, some of it may condescend them.
I would bet that MW sales per capita in Middle America are better than the Coasts.
I know politically America has become 2 countries but is it also the same culturally?
Here in the UK (and I bet our German posters may agree), sexism is a major issue.
MW can play the "oh it's so delightfully retro chic it's avant garde" card only for so long.
It really needs to break out of its anachronisms if it wants to appeal to other societies.
So my position on Mage Wars art depiction of females is that it needs to step up a gear.
Add humour so that any perceived sexism can be deflected as lacking a sense of humour.
Make it work both ways - yes, that does mean an armoured Xena and a Tarzan-like himbo.
Subvert stereotypes (carnivorous plants was a lost opportunity for humourous vegetarian diet flavour text).
Don't patronise fans: it's a complex game and its fans are proud of their intelligence so pander to it instead.
In short, please be more subtle with your female depictions?
Because currently there may be US Coastal and European markets that view its retro art as anachronistic.
Retro is a fashion with no longevity unless tongue-in-cheek.
My grandmother uses racist language; I think many grandparents do and we accept it as generation culture.
When I look at Mage Wars art, I view it as Middle America, still stuck in Frazetta's scantily clad nubile women.
Just like my grandmother with her racist language, no malice is intended, it's just a culturally associated trope.
That's why I am less stressed than Kich on this - I just hope a more international perspective is adopted soon.
If that was me pussy-footing trying to get change through reason, to ask for small changes not earth-shaking differences that jar with existing artwork, and certainly not calling Arcane Wonders sexist bigots like she does on their forum (what incredible chutzpah!), I then go on to make my position crystal clear (this before she made her three pronged attack on 3 posters).
Yes, she is an awesome-looking clothed female Jedi/Sith Lord, proof that you don't need to keep them in bikinis.
However, would it be unfair to say that this isn't always the case?
I don't have the cards but is Samandriel (most powerful female creature) in a bikini like Jokhtari and Priestess?
This is so dangerous posting at work without the cards but I'm sure I'd subconsciously spotted a subtext here.
Women in Etheria prefer to sunbathe, not shop (oh dear, I'm gonna get clobbered by the PC brigade for that).
As Kich said elsewhere about a male and female of a new race: "he's dressed for the streets. she's dressed for the sheets".
Hey, this isn't my battle, it's Kich's: I just understand both views (you know what sitting on the fence gives you).
I'm personally fine with the art but the marketer in me thinks you should tone it down - or better still subvert it.
Imagine a female posing like in Michaelangelo's Thinker?
Or a male emerging from a shell like in Botticelli's Venus?
Ok, both too cultural as in-jokes but I'm sure there are US archetypes you can subvert.
It would just help to knowingly poke fun at fantasy tropes.
A bearded Dwarf Dowager berserker, with female breastplate, would solve that age old mystery...
It's really difficult because if you take a risk (like the Necromancer book which I love), you'll offend some people.
But if you don't take risks, you become stale and cliche to your "seen it all before" jaded market.
All I am proposing is a bit more humour, subverting what we fantasy fans expect - but in a way that doesn't jar.
Hey, I'm personally fine with your art (Nightshade Lotus is an incredibly beautiful masterpiece).
I just think you could alienate unexplored markets so should make Etheria feel less old-fashion.
So far the only non-white face is a savage barbarian shaman (female so scantily clad) who resists the colonising crusaders.
I'm not offended by it at all (in fact, I've said Kumanjaro is seeped in thematic strength).
But you can see how that sole depiction could be viewed, a very white colonial mindset.
All we're missing is a mincing elf bard and his spikey-haired warrior-maiden bodyguard and we'll have a full set!
The bottom line is this: if the roles were reversed and I had attacked her like she attacked me (just go read her one-sided carefully edited rant again, just after she attacked you and Laddin, oh she was on a roll), if I attacked her in a similar fashion, do you think I would be still allowed on this forum?
But that's just her militancy, it's understandable. What I take issue with is she attacked me for giving a balanced view and it was me who got taken to task for an exasperated comment (I'm not even religious, we're mostly agnostic here in godless Britain). I know Kich mischievously sandwiched his post with references to my comment that was obviously not aimed at him (as he had not made any intervening comments) and that this was taken to mean it was offensive in some way. Well done, Kich, for selling them a feigned insult that could never have been aimed at you. Still, it was me who was singled out for sanctioning, symptomatic of default positive discrimination when dealing with minority activists (feminists are a minority, women are not), afraid of being tarred as bigoted. And such knee jerk reactions are dangerous!
Freedom of speech works both ways. Except when it doesn't. "All view are equal. But some are more equal than others."
Deckbuilder, I did not call your post a rant, I said it's length and irritable, frustrated language made it strongly resemble one. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. Also, I really don't think militant is the right word to use here at all. I suspect that's part of why people are reacting so strongly and perceiving you as a bigot. Some of your word choices seem a bit aggressive. And Aylin did not attack either of us. She expressed her honest opinion just like you are doing.
In fact, it seems to me that we're all disagreeing on details but agreeing in the main points, which are that Arcane Wonders could tone down the sexist mage art a bit, that while sexist depictions of women are unfortunate, it's up to Arcane Wonders to figure out what sells best and to whom, and that there are multiple simple solutions to the issue of sexist mage art, like allowing fan made mage art.
Let's all take a step back for a moment, calm down and stop getting so sidetracked.
-
Well I can see somebody didn't take the time to enjoy that video I posted.... :'(
-
Where'd your link go? That video is hilarious! Great way to tell people to get back on topic and also break the ice. Although maybe a moderator didn't see it that way. Is posting to tell people to stay on topic an off topic post?
Hmm...
Well anyways, let's continue discussing sexist mage art and possible solutions, whether those solutions are necessary etc.
-
Imaginator,
I don't think a DIY solution by itself would fully work. So many people lack any artistic ability at all, so they would be reliant on finding new artworks to use in their games on ebay or etsy or another site designed to sell such items. I not sure it would allow most players to get improved artwork for their sets.
However, I do think your idea has merit! Many people would enjoy making their own cards to play with. Making new Outposts for use with the Warlord, or some higher-level Water spells would be awesome, and I would love to see your idea implemented! I just think that another solution (like a new pack of artwork for mages) should be implemented alongside it.
Deckbuilder,
While I appreciate how obsessed with me you've been in this thread (every single post you've made in this thread since I initially responded to you has referenced me in some way), I would ask that you please stop insulting me. You've repeated called me militant, you've accused me of being childish and maliciously editing your post in my reply, and you've been accusing me of attacking other posters.
However, disagreeing with someone isn't an attack. I never attack Laddinfance; he asked what was wrong with the Forcemaster and I answered that. I never insulted him, treated him as inferior, or did anything that didn't explain why the clothing the Forcemaster was wearing was ridiculous. I never attacked Imaginator either; we just disagreed whether or not this discussion should appear in public view or only in private messages. I was of the opinion that as long as the discussion remained civil then there wouldn't be a problem. How are either of those even remotely an attack?
You've accused me multiple times of editing your post in such a way as to misrepresent your argument. So far you've been vague on what parts misrepresented you, even after I offered to edit my post to include whatever you would like from the post in question. If you're going to continue to accuse me of this, at least have the integrity to work towards an amicable solution with me, instead of ignoring my offer and continually attacking me.
I'm unsure what exactly makes me a militant also. All I did was express my opinion, and I've even apologized to you when it was clear that you were upset.
And finally, please stop attempting to rewrite this very thread. I never called Arcane Wonders a bigot nor did I disagree with your suggestion that they should tone down the sexist art. If I thought Arcane Wonders was being intentionally sexist or bigoted I would never have purchased the game or suggested it to my friends. There is a difference between thinking that an action is sexist and thinking that a person or group is sexist. I definitely think that the art is sexist, but I also think that Arcane Wonders didn't intend for it to be so and that they can work on this problem in future expansions. The only things I vocally disagreed with you on were your claims that the sexist art wasn't offensive, didn't hurt anyone, and that they should just play it off as humour.
I really hope that you'll cease your attacks against me. I don't want to be your enemy, and I think that two people can disagree with each other and still be civil. We both agree that the artwork should be altered, so can we just focus on that please? If you'd like to talk about the other stuff in a civil way I wouldn't mind continuing through PMs.
Back on topic:
One thing that we've thus far ignored is that the only humanoid explicitly female creatures currently in the game are either Archers or Angels (or the Siren). Many of the other humanoids are androgynous, such as the Knight of Westlock (female armour doesn't actually have boob-shapes in it because that would be detrimental to fighting), the Temple High Guard, the Goblin Grunt, or the Blue Gremlin. If we could get some named female soldiers that are actually wearing proper armour many of the androgynous creatures wouldn't seem to be male by default (due to the present artwork for obviously female cards), and I would love to see some in future expansions.
Also, DDD, I still see the link to your YT video.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTLwiccIOxI
How about we all enjoy this song that makes me think of Shad0w.
<Like!>
Love the lyrics. Shame about the tune...
Disclaimer: This opinion is my own personal opinion and is in no way meant to prejudice others, display any forms of racism. sexism or, worst of all, music snobbery that insists on tunes and melody, not just clever lyrics.
Legal Disclaimer: Opinions may rise or fall. You may end up with opinions that have less value than what you invested.
-
There's some passionate people here so I'll make my comments short:
A) As a thirty-something male, I find the female art in Mage Wars a little offensive, not only because people I'd like to interest in the game are more likely to assume it's juvenile, but because it carries the implicit assumption that gamers have to be enticed by scantily clad women to buy a new product.
B) The scantily clad women are obvious enough that at least one reviewer has facetiously summarized the premise of Mage Wars as "what if Playboy models had magic powers."
http://drakesflames.com/board-game-review-mage-wars/
-
Like Laddin said as long as this continues in a civil manner I have no issues with allowing the discussion to happen but if it turns into a flame war or somebody tries to use it as a soapbox to force an idea onto others then we will no choice but to lock this thread.
addendum - Keep it on topic
-
The thread that just won't die quietly. I'll keep this on topic, Shadow...
(A quick aside: what a great review! I've sent it to all my gaming friends yet to be converted...)
What do people think about the Mage naming conventions used by Mage Wars?
More than the images for me (my defence is personal taste), I really don't like the male bias of the names
Forcemaster sounds male to me; am I being judgemental? (Mentalist or Forcewielder is less gender specific.)
I often refer to Jokhtari Beastmaster as Beastmistress just out of short hand (I'm not alone on this forum)
Because to add a subregion seems so clunky as a mage title
A female Warlock to me is a Witch (or rather a male Witch is called a Warlock), both gain power from an entity
Sirens are female only (in my preconception) because sailors were male
Wizards are a club for old men because they based on knowledge, libraries only that gentleman's club access
Now innate spell casters (bloodline) would be a Sorceror or Sorceress
I'm happy with a female Paladin, even if historically Charlemagne's 12 were all male
I'm happy with Knight of Westlock being revealed as a woman, like Brienne of Tarth
It's just that some names feel forced (to avoid "Priest can use Priestess cards" text")
When they could be more flavoursome and highlight the gender in the name more!
I don't know what the solution is here when you want variant mages
Maybe take a leaf from another game and use Race + Class, ensuring different combos?
Am I alone here in feeling this about Mage Wars naming culture?
Or am I being teribly political incorrect expressing this disquiet? (It has been known...)
So folks, Mage Wars Mage naming conventions, especially gender connotations (so that it's on topic) - discuss?
-
The thread that just won't die quietly. I'll keep this on topic, Shadow...
(A quick aside: what a great review! I've sent it to all my gaming friends yet to be converted...)
What do people think about the Mage naming conventions used by Mage Wars?
More than the images for me (my defence is personal taste), I really don't like the male bias of the names
Forcemaster sounds male to me; am I being judgemental? (Mentalist or Forcewielder is less gender specific.)
I often refer to Jokhtari Beastmaster as Beastmistress just out of short hand (I'm not alone on this forum)
Because to add a subregion seems so clunky as a mage title
A female Warlock to me is a Witch (or rather a male Witch is called a Warlock), both gain power from an entity
Sirens are female only (in my preconception) because sailors were male
Wizards are a club for old men because they based on knowledge, libraries only that gentleman's club access
Now innate spell casters (bloodline) would be a Sorceror or Sorceress
I'm happy with a female Paladin, even if historically Charlemagne's 12 were all male
I'm happy with Knight of Westlock being revealed as a woman, like Brienne of Tarth
It's just that some names feel forced (to avoid "Priest can use Priestess cards" text")
When they could be more flavoursome and highlight the gender in the name more!
I don't know what the solution is here when you want variant mages
Maybe take a leaf from another game and use Race + Class, ensuring different combos?
Am I alone here in feeling this about Mage Wars naming culture?
Or am I being teribly political incorrect expressing this disquiet? (It has been known...)
So folks, Mage Wars Mage naming conventions, especially gender connotations (so that it's on topic) - discuss?
Except that the title of this thread is "alternative female mage art", so if you're talking about naming instead of artwork, then it is not on topic.
-
"Hanna, Knight of Westlock"
Same art, slight name change
"Huntress" from Jokhtari
Same art, a more individual name
"Forcewielder" from Cathay or Taipan (not Pellian)
Same art, a less masculine name with Far East connotations
"Brunhilda Deadye, Sniper"
Same adrogynous art, like the assassin in Stars Wars 2
A card is both its name, its art and any flavour text (as well as its game parameters of course)
It's the entire package
To distinguish between the name and art is as facile as saying a Female Elf is more real than a Male Elf!
A name invokes images just by connotations
Is Jebediah a name you associate with a sage or a warrior?
Is Bladesinger a mage class you associate with an elf or a dwarf?
Words have power
This forum is proof of that
But I guess the connection is lost on some
-
"Huntress" from Jokhtari
Same art, a more individual name
There's no need to rename her. Doing so would be clunky (since her card would then require a note saying she can use Beastmaster-Only spells) and unnecessary as master in this context only implies someone who is proficient at something.
"Forcewielder" from Cathay or Taipan (not Pellian)
Same art, a less masculine name with Far East connotations
Forcewielder isn't quite as imposing as Forcemaster, since 'wielder' doesn't imply proficiency - only use. And again, 'master' in this context doesn't imply a gender.
-
I was hoping this thread would evolve into a special swimsuit edition of the female mages, well all mages if males tickle your fancy.
Can we get a special print of all the current mages in swimsuits????
-
Glorious! Darn it, I can't get the image out of my infantile mind...
"If I won Miss Etheria, I'd campaign for World Peace and an end to the barbaric arena duels, just pure outdated machismo..."
But what you suggest is bad, Aquestrion! It's naughty to suggest it and you know what happens to naughty...
I'll stop there.
-
Alright- Here is my solution.
Take a mage card
Put it in a "penny sleeve"
Draw over mage cards with marker.
You can also draw new cloths or accessories to really compliment you mage. Wish you mage had a new staff? Draw it. Want your Beastmaster to have a runny nose? Just take a green sharpie and make your wildest dreams come true.
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
-
Except that the title of this thread is "alternative female mage art", so if you're talking about naming instead of artwork, then it is not on topic.
That is correct and last chance to stay on topic.
-
In case where I stand on Aquestrion's idea is misinterpreted...
I am particularly looking forward to the swim-suited Bloodwave Warlord in all his hairy glory. Phwoar!
(Background Diet Coke ads theme music...)
This, folks, is satire (though it lacks bite for my go-for-the-throat taste), parodying thankfully marginalised crass beauty competitions (USA uses kids according to Little Miss Sunshine?) whilst also highlighting the absurdity of discussing political correctness with the game's violent premise backdrop that glorifies bloodsports gladiatorial carnage while lacking the knowing satire of, say, The Hunger Games. Also subverting societal norm expectations of "beauty" in this addendum post. Just spelling it out in case I get taken to task here. My reservations, holding out on the invite for a few months, was being "establishment" would compromise my freedom of expression (whilst staying within societal norms and forum etiquette). So I wish to reiterate that my opinions (and alleged humour) expressed in this thread are purely mine, not endorsed by any other institution etc.
(This is post is a follow-up to Aquestrion's post which, I believe, is squarely "on topic", if blatantly facetious.)
-
I love the penny sleeve idea. It really does solve the concerns voiced by some of the players. But I'm not so how do I put this. I have the worst drawling skills ever. If someone could pre print these sleeves for me I would gladly pay for your time. It might convince my sister to allow my nieces to play with the priestess. Maybe some for the angels and other scantily clad artwork.(I have no problem with scantily clad men or women)
I really think that op kits could include ALTERNATE MAGE CARDS not specifically mage related perse but a generalized male dwarf mage clad in neutral armor. So if wanted he could be a priest or a warlock. Just a compleatly blank mage with no ability card. This would encourage more organized play and also not deduct from the spell tomes and expansions card pack counts. Then people could use a great looking mage earned by playing op kits.(sorry people who don't have access to op kits organized play or able to go to conventions.) Also could be made into a 10 card "booster" pack adding new mages without changing the meta maybe with some enhanced art mages in it.
-
I already use the Priest portrait card with the Priestess's ability card, and if I ever wanted to use the J. Beastmaster ability card I'd still use the S. Beastmaster portrait card.
-
I love the penny sleeve idea. It really does solve the concerns voiced by some of the players. But I'm not so how do I put this. I have the worst drawling skills ever. If someone could pre print these sleeves for me I would gladly pay for your time. It might convince my sister to allow my nieces to play with the priestess. Maybe some for the angels and other scantily clad artwork.(I have no problem with scantily clad men or women)
I really think that op kits could include ALTERNATE MAGE CARDS not specifically mage related perse but a generalized male dwarf mage clad in neutral armor. So if wanted he could be a priest or a warlock. Just a compleatly blank mage with no ability card. This would encourage more organized play and also not deduct from the spell tomes and expansions card pack counts. Then people could use a great looking mage earned by playing op kits.(sorry people who don't have access to op kits organized play or able to go to conventions.) Also could be made into a 10 card "booster" pack adding new mages without changing the meta maybe with some enhanced art mages in it.
You could just print out your own pictures or use photo shop- cut out the card- and stick it in said sleeve. I understand that people want AW to make alternate cards- but in some situations where if the art is a problem, that can be done.
-
I am artfully challenged. I just offered up an idea according to the thread. I would like an official AW product not a self created proxy. I think it is a good idea. That would hopefully make money and make it accessible to all members of the forums even the ones overseas.
-
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
It doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't change how AW presents female mages or creatures.
Using markers or Photoshop (depending on the skill of the person using it) won't allow the artwork to look natural with the rest of the set. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.
-
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
It doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't change how AW presents female mages or creatures.
Using markers or Photoshop (depending on the skill of the person using it) won't allow the artwork to look natural with the rest of the set. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.
I think that we should have all women dressed in Burka's and the men dressed in heavy armor with closed helmets. This way no one will know what or who anyone is. Are they good looking or ugly? Tall or Short? Thin or Fat? This would solve the problem with the human (or not so human) form. We just don't want to look at it, as it is bad and detracts from a game about maiming and killing others.
-
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
It doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't change how AW presents female mages or creatures.
Using markers or Photoshop (depending on the skill of the person using it) won't allow the artwork to look natural with the rest of the set. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.
Are you sure? I think that I may have. ::) (It was a joke...I was being sarcastic, while at the same time trying to keep the mood light. Sarcasim- its a thing! ;D) (Thats my slogan for sarcasm- its not directed at whoever I quoted)
-
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
It doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't change how AW presents female mages or creatures.
Using markers or Photoshop (depending on the skill of the person using it) won't allow the artwork to look natural with the rest of the set. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.
I think that we should have all women dressed in Burka's and the men dressed in heavy armor with closed helmets. This way no one will know what or who anyone is. Are they good looking or ugly? Tall or Short? Thin or Fat? This would solve the problem with the human (or not so human) form. We just don't want to look at it, as it is bad and detracts from a game about maiming and killing others.
TBH- this touches on what is the actual issue here of what is culturally acceptable and personally tasteful. This issue is far less about anybody being in the right or in the wrong- its far more about what people perceive (in their own veiw) to be right or wrong. (Now I am commenting something relating to the issue on the thread......oh God.)
-
Thanks Darth, for catching the satire in my comment. There is absolutely no way for AW to win on this conversation. If they went the direction that is being asked on this thread, they would be Duck Dynasty'ed by fan on the other side of the fence. For the people (whom I do have a lot of respect for) I would suggest that you use proxies for your female mages and you can place Post-it notes over the cards with "titillating" art work this should allow the youngsters to play the game.
-
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
It doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't change how AW presents female mages or creatures.
Using markers or Photoshop (depending on the skill of the person using it) won't allow the artwork to look natural with the rest of the set. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.
Are you sure? I think that I may have. ::) (It was a joke...I was being sarcastic, while at the same time trying to keep the mood light. Sarcasim- its a thing! ;D) (Thats my slogan for sarcasm- its not directed at whoever I quoted)
I was hoping you weren't being serious, though it's hard to tell on forums. I have seen worse suggestions put forth seriously.
-
Ya- Sarcasm doesn't translate all to well in the written state.
Neither does the phrase "You say potato, I say potato." ;D
-
The problem isn't that I have to use sexy-priestess. I can use whatever thing I want, if I don't mind confusing my opponent; like the Top Hat from monopoly, I guess.
The problem is that AW is putting out a product which exhaustively treats women as eye-candy, because apparently that's what it is believed the market wants.
Honestly, it's weird to me that fans object to diversifying the presentation of women. It's important to people that all women in mage wars must stay sexy? Is this a factor on which people make their buying decissions? Are there really people who would be upset if Mage Wars stopped sexualizing all the women in the art?
Like "sexy babe" is the expected default feature for all geek media and simply stopping is somehow a bold political statement? Like offering alternatives (hopefully well executed and generally awesome) is an intrusion into an important quality of the game?
Are people going to be pissed off that Alt Wizard doesn't happen to be sexy?
-
Ok- I started by saying I wasn't going to comment on the topic at hand....but seeing as this is the only thread with a pulse ATM...
( This is more about the art as a whole- Yes, I can agree that some more Mage cards could be produced with females in full armor but I guarantee you that a female paladin would be, since, that makes sense. A priestess, not so much, your views on religion might be a little narrow if you believe so.)
"Are people going to be pissed off that Alt Wizard doesn't happen to be sexy?"
No. I would hope not. But....if there is a "Seductress" Or more likely- a "sorcereres" or enchantress- I would be a little mad if she didn't have any sex appeal (Not that sex appeal cant mean different things to different people, but to me, its the standard fair).
To be honest- Im not happy when Harpies dont have breast exposed. Is it because I want to see a monsters breast- no. Its because its what I have become accustomed to- you dont want to see a green smurf do you???
Im going to end this by saying- Wouldn't it be fair to everyone if we had both? Both the 80s generic pulp fantasy art that I grew up on and more realistic representation of both sexes? That seems to be the most fair to me.
And Mage Wars already dose this- and that is why I personally dont see a problem.
Most games I play dont even try. They just dont.
And we're not just talking about me wanting to see boobies here, your talking about nostalgia, and to some degree, my culture.
(http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2012/314/d/4/dispel_by_dleoblack-d5kkcn8.jpg)
If you want better depiction of women in fantasy games.....well.....here it is. Courtesy of Mage Wars.
-
I don't really want to get involved in this argument. However, here are some more appropriately dressed female mage cards for anybody that absolutely has to have an alternative:
(http://s11.postimg.org/62o350qmn/Druid.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/62o350qmn/) (http://s11.postimg.org/4z3yt25zj/Forcemaster.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4z3yt25zj/)(http://s30.postimg.org/ipyoxerf1/Johktari.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ipyoxerf1/) (http://s30.postimg.org/pugi6fyod/Priestess.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/pugi6fyod/)
Others for stylistic consistency:
(http://s30.postimg.org/x9afck9xp/Beastmaster.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/x9afck9xp/) (http://s30.postimg.org/5xf6b8571/Necromancer.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/5xf6b8571/)(http://s17.postimg.org/kqgc5r42j/Priest.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/kqgc5r42j/) (http://s17.postimg.org/ixdfhfivv/Warlock.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ixdfhfivv/)(http://s30.postimg.org/3zd3qz231/Warlord.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/3zd3qz231/) (http://s30.postimg.org/m0w8orw3x/Wizard.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/m0w8orw3x/)
-
I got a kick out of the Beastmaster! ;D
-
I don't really want to get involved in this argument. However, here are some more appropriately dressed female mage cards for anybody that absolutely has to have an alternative:
(http://s11.postimg.org/62o350qmn/Druid.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/62o350qmn/) (http://s11.postimg.org/4z3yt25zj/Forcemaster.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4z3yt25zj/)(http://s30.postimg.org/ipyoxerf1/Johktari.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ipyoxerf1/) (http://s30.postimg.org/pugi6fyod/Priestess.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/pugi6fyod/)
Others for stylistic consistency:
(http://s30.postimg.org/x9afck9xp/Beastmaster.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/x9afck9xp/) (http://s30.postimg.org/5xf6b8571/Necromancer.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/5xf6b8571/)(http://s17.postimg.org/kqgc5r42j/Priest.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/kqgc5r42j/) (http://s17.postimg.org/ixdfhfivv/Warlock.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ixdfhfivv/)(http://s30.postimg.org/3zd3qz231/Warlord.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/3zd3qz231/) (http://s30.postimg.org/m0w8orw3x/Wizard.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/m0w8orw3x/)
@ACG
Problem solved! Well, we need opposite sex representation of all the mage types also so we need a Male J Beastmaster and a Female S Beastmaster, a male Druid, etc., remember keep it androgynous, as there is no difference between male and female....
The problem is that AW is putting out a product which exhaustively treats women as eye-candy, because apparently that's what it is believed the market wants.
Exhaustively? What have you been doing that makes you exhausted?
I am sure the Oracles of Delphi dressed completely different than depicted for the Priestess, more than likely head to toe everything covered nun like....
-
If you want better depiction of women in fantasy games.....well.....here it is. Courtesy of Mage Wars.
The expansions have taken some steps to redress the way Mage Wars depicts women (I'd particularly like to thank the art director or whoever it is for putting the third named angel in armor, since the first two were less tasteful), and Incantation cards with fully clothed women on them are nice, but it doesn't change the fact that three out of the four female mages are essentially wearing lingerie. That's what's really giving the impression that Mage Wars equates women with eye candy.
-
I don't really want to get involved in this argument. However, here are some more appropriately dressed female mage cards for anybody that absolutely has to have an alternative:
(http://s11.postimg.org/62o350qmn/Druid.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/62o350qmn/) (http://s11.postimg.org/4z3yt25zj/Forcemaster.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/4z3yt25zj/)(http://s30.postimg.org/ipyoxerf1/Johktari.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ipyoxerf1/) (http://s30.postimg.org/pugi6fyod/Priestess.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/pugi6fyod/)
Others for stylistic consistency:
(http://s30.postimg.org/x9afck9xp/Beastmaster.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/x9afck9xp/) (http://s30.postimg.org/5xf6b8571/Necromancer.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/5xf6b8571/)(http://s17.postimg.org/kqgc5r42j/Priest.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/kqgc5r42j/) (http://s17.postimg.org/ixdfhfivv/Warlock.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/ixdfhfivv/)(http://s30.postimg.org/3zd3qz231/Warlord.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/3zd3qz231/) (http://s30.postimg.org/m0w8orw3x/Wizard.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/m0w8orw3x/)
@ACG
Problem solved! Well, we need opposite sex representation of all the mage types also so we need a Male J Beastmaster and a Female S Beastmaster, a male Druid, etc., remember keep it androgynous, as there is no difference between male and female....
Could you please keep the straw men out of it? Thanks.
Also you should know that the J. Beastmaster was released as the female version of the S. Beastmaster.
-
I agree with many here that AW did not intentionally choose artwork that objectified women, however the situation is that some of the artwork does. My modest proposal for alternative versions of the female mages was not an attempt to elicit such a conversation as has developed here but I have found it edifying to hear so many voices taking this issue seriously and understanding how the egregious portrayal of women, even in a game, is distasteful and archaic.
It is testament to the passion that players have towards Mage Wars that this issue has been taken so seriously. There are many, many games available to play and the easiest solution is to walk away from any that players find distasteful, some of my opponents feel thus and this limits my personal enjoyment of the game as it gets fewer plays.
To some this issue might seem insignificant, either their own view does not regard the objectification of women as important or they prefer to view a fantasy world in a historically 'male-centric' manner. But to many of us this is a pressing issue, I have two daughters and wish them to have all the opportunities my son will have. These are big issues, which will not be solved by changing a few female depictions in a niche game in a niche hobby. However, AW as a publisher, has a responsibility to consider these issues when commissioning artwork, I do hope they listen and consider the views expressed on this thread.
So to bring it all back to my original request - some alternative female artwork would be fantastic...
-
As someone suggested earlier, I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is on this and would gladly pay for an alternative art pack that had new cards for the priestess, J. beastmaster, druid, the two core named angels, and maybe a guardian angel or two.
-
I suggested neutrally classed alternate mage cards, Not reissued cards. I wanted brand new cards and I am not willing to pay for cards I already have even if they are scantily clad.
-
That should make everybody happy. I've singlehandedly solved the issue- Your all welcome.
It doesn't solve the issue as it doesn't change how AW presents female mages or creatures.
Using markers or Photoshop (depending on the skill of the person using it) won't allow the artwork to look natural with the rest of the set. It'll stick out like a sore thumb.
I think that we should have all women dressed in Burka's and the men dressed in heavy armor with closed helmets. This way no one will know what or who anyone is. Are they good looking or ugly? Tall or Short? Thin or Fat? This would solve the problem with the human (or not so human) form. We just don't want to look at it, as it is bad and detracts from a game about maiming and killing others.
TBH- this touches on what is the actual issue here of what is culturally acceptable and personally tasteful. This issue is far less about anybody being in the right or in the wrong- its far more about what people perceive (in their own veiw) to be right or wrong. (Now I am commenting something relating to the issue on the thread......oh God.)
You got lured in again. This time you even warned yourself.
-
I agree with many here that AW did not intentionally choose artwork that objectified women, however the situation is that some of the artwork does. My modest proposal (http://grammar.about.com/od/60essays/a/modpropoessay.htm) for alternative versions of the female mages was not an attempt to elicit such a conversation as has developed here but I have found it edifying to hear so many voices taking this issue seriously and understanding how the egregious portrayal of women, even in a game, is distasteful and archaic.
It is testament to the passion that players have towards Mage Wars that this issue has been taken so seriously. There are many, many games available to play and the easiest solution is to walk away from any that players find distasteful, some of my opponents feel thus and this limits my personal enjoyment of the game as it gets fewer plays.
To some this issue might seem insignificant, either their own view does not regard the objectification of women as important or they prefer to view a fantasy world in a historically 'male-centric' manner. But to many of us this is a pressing issue, I have two daughters and wish them to have all the opportunities my son will have. These are big issues, which will not be solved by changing a few female depictions in a niche game in a niche hobby. However, AW as a publisher, has a responsibility to consider these issues when commissioning artwork, I do hope they listen and consider the views expressed on this thread.
So to bring it all back to my original request - some alternative female artwork would be fantastic...
I was hoping for a Swift style satirical essay(would have give 2-3 stickers) . The chance has passed the moment is gone.
-
I would have taken the bait, Shad0w, but I've actually changed my position on this issue.
After further discussions on passive media sexism, I've had an epiphany, a Road to Damascus conversion.
Two factors (among others) were instrumental in changing my mind.
(1) Mass Perception vs. Enlightened Perception
I may be modernist enough to see self-parodying humour in Barbarella-style media, which Mage Wars definitely models itself on, whilst still retaining my respect for women, a belief that beauty pageants are crassly offensive and promote self-hate, eating disorders etc, even appreciation that women are often disenfranchised in society so, at the risk of condescending, need more encouragement (confidence is a more male trait and self-criticism more female).
But just because I can distinguish real life issues and fantasy pastiche does not mean others can. Sophisticates may say "oh, it's sooo avant garde!" about Madonna's Sex coffee table book but to many, it's just exploitative softcore porn (I veered towards porn as only a few images were striking, even thought-provoking, hence art). In the same way, I can see the gloriously over-the-top parody in Sin City (e.g. "just give it to him good" said facing camera) but to many others, it's an ultra-violent tale gratuitously filled with scantily dressed women that hides its violence, especially towards women, under a veneer of surreal imagery. So who is to say such media images would not propagate violence towards women in the mind of someone less able to perceive the artistic style and tone?
So just because liberal intelligentsia see no harm in an image does not mean it is not harmful. You have to view it from the point of view of the more prevalant consumer. In the case of Mage Wars, it is the geek demographic who, if I am to propagate stereotypes, are blessed with mental intelligence but often lack "social intelligence". This all harks back to Kich's "We're too smart to be sexist" comment on page 1 of this thread. I think there's a danger that we mix mental intelligence with social intelligence and this confidence will unwittingly lure us into supporting views that, if seen through the eyes of "Joe or Jane Doe", the average person on the street, would be seen as inadvertently endorsing a sexist viewpoint.
(2) Imprinting Children - Generational Cultural Change
The other issue is linked to my "change is incremental" belief and is the effect images have on the young. Many Mage Wars afficionados will teach their children the game. Just as every generation is less racist than the last (my grandmother), it is important to promote more positive images of women seen in traditional male roles (and vice versa) so as to not close doors or gender stereotype.
This is the Nature vs. Nurture chestnut. Children are not born racist or sexist. It's imprinted on them from an early age by the environment, the parents who pass on their own value systems to them, be it a pink or a blue room or a Cooking Set vs. a Chemistry Set. It's therefore important to be enlightened around children so that, if this is propagated through the generations, the environment slowly changes to be less sexist over time until a tipping point when this becomes prevalent. Change is incremental - there are very few cultural forest fires.
As a non-parent, I have to be more aware of the concerns of parents, their worries of how imagery develop children during their formative years. This is very relevant to Mage Wars where there would be inter-generational pressure to play with the parent's latest obsession, and where a child, eager to please, may copy inadvertent sexism inherent in the activity by taking it at face value, lacking an adult sophisticated mindset. Parents can really mess up children without knowing it (I speak from experience).
Summary
And so, at the risk of being labelled a "Kharhaz" (that species renown for jumping over fences and switching camps at the drop of a hat, albeit on facile game mechanic issues), I have now been convinced (by friends and Trotsy's post above which resonated with me) that it would be best to err on the side of prudery and be labelled a killjoy, at least for my conscience so that I am not inadvertently indoctrinating children or propagating mainstream prejudices.
It would be great if the whole world could distinguish between fantasy and reality easily.
It would be great if children were not vulnerable to imprinting.
But sadly, this is not the case and I now feel ashamed I was provoked (after my initial fence-sitting) into playing to the gallery.
Geeks have a proud tradition of being ahead of society's cultural mores.
The first TV inter-racial kiss.
Gay and lesbian major characters.
Equal gender opportunity utopias.
We should be proud we're often more enlightened than the mainstream.
So it's a shame than we're not vocal in criticising a mainstream agenda.
Instead, we opt for the elitist non-confrontational cop-out that is...
"We geeks are far too smart or sophisticated to ever be sexist".
Addendum to ensure topic relevance:
What can Arcane Wonders do about this issue?
It would be asking much to suggest a jarring change of art style that risks alienating their core base.
They are primarily a business, not political, thus will succumb to business incentives and pressures.
After all, commissioning art pieces is expensive.
The suggestion of a Booster Pack of alternative art for old cards (sold at small profit) is a great idea.
After all, if this helps current evangelists convert non-players who otherwise find it offensive, great!
Going forward, I would suggest a move from Solus to Portfolio Marketing.
Instead of just 1 expansion, have 2 - identical except for ALL the artwork.
The Classic edition will have artwork in its Retro style for its current fans.
The Modern edition will have artwork in a Modernist style so not offensive.
The OCD collectors may even buy both sets just for the different art styles.
Then they track sales of these 2 editions before deciding their next action.
Create a "Diet Coke variant "of Mage Wars then let Supply & Demand rule.
Leverage the marketing adage: "threats are just opportunities in disguise".
Let's not ask for too much, for then you just get none!
After all, in life, the reality is: "change is incremental".
-
@Deckbuilder
While interesting this comes down on the Feminist we are victims point of view. Gloria Steinem, Naomi Wolf and Susan Faludi would have us believe that the differences between men and women are just a social constructs. While the Pagila side has a much (in my opinion) where women are empowered by things such as showing bra straps, dressing sexy (as long as they fully understand the impact of such dress), and such.
I believe the neo-feminism espoused by the OP is misguided and in some cases can be quite destructive.
-
It's a good riposte, sIKE, but I don't think this issue should be belittled to a battle of wits.
Is Trotsy's impassioned plea that his/her children grow up in a more gender-equal world a "neo-feminist" view? I lose track here.
I thought Naomi Wolf (the only feminist I recognise, sorry for failng my "Feminist Lore" skill check) was thought of as neo-feminist?
I guess "neo-" is a prefix added to the cyclical view that is currently out-of-fashion?
Although Trotsky's last post resonated, I read it after my conversion (which happened in the early hours of 2014 GMT after too much Champagne and Glayva).
My change of position was based on (1) Mass Perception and (2) Imprinting arguments, neither of which were Trotsky's argument.
It's a bit like gun law. I know the second amendment is culturally enshrined in the USA (and not us Europeans).
It seems wrong to give irresponsible people a loaded gun.
And that is what sexually loaded images are, with kids and idiots around - a loaded double barrelled gun.
Luckily, everyone is entitled to their viewpoint and to express it (1st amendment, which I heartily agree with).
As long as this viewpoint does not harm others (I subscribe to John Stuart Mill's principle of freedom)
Hollywood does not insert Arwen and Tauriel romances into Tolkein to keep feminists happy.
They insert it because it sells more tickets, creates greater empathy with half the population.
(Even if Wood Elf - Hill Dwarf coupling just feels so wrong - I guess I'm not into fantasy racial integration.)
It also allows male geeks with wives or girlfriends (hopefully just 1) to bring her along and endure them reliving their childhood.
It's all about commercial sense.
That's why I suggested a Portfolio Marketing solution to this issue.
Because we are all different.
-
@ sIKE
I'm not convinced the sexy = empowered argument is applicable in this case because the sexy women involved aren't real. The priestess can't feel empowered because she looks good in her wedding night lingerie since there isn't a real priestess. By the same token, the women in Mage Wars aren't victims of men dressing them up and then leering at them because the women involved are fictional. The only effect you'll get is the effect on the viewer. So the question we have to ask is "What impressions are likely to be created in the viewer by game art that depicts women as primarily (although not exclusively, as we've pointed out) scantily clad super models?" As Deckbuilder correctly pointed out, this creates the impression among many viewers that A) game nerds like to depict women as sex objects, and (especially among the young) B) it is okay for me to view women largely as sex objects. In my opinion, these impressions are both to be avoided.
-
@DeckBuilder (http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?action=profile;u=4281)
No matter how tempting I decline to take the bait.
P.S. Thank you all for staying on topic and act civil as we review this issue.
-
@Deckbuilder
I changed tack here on my last post so as to make it known that I am not just trolling here, but to debate. My earlier points in the thread were basically stating what one finds insulting for others it doesn't and for those other changing would be insulting. The argument can not have a winners just losers if they make the change team A will be happy and team B will be displeased otoh if team B wins then team A will be displeased.
@Webcatcher
So as I stated earlier, I am guessing the Oracles dressed more like nuns (in Habits) than the Priestess depicted in Mage Wars. My understanding of Greek history was that women of that age were mightily empowered and dressed to appeal to a mans eye. Hope there is nothing wrong with that kind of thought.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58842665/HelenOfSparta01A.jpg)
Current historical thoughts on how Helen of Troy Appeared
-
@Deckbuilder
Are two sets actually necessary? The Forcemaster's art is the best of the released female mages thus far, the problems really only arising upon close scrutiny of the art from that set coupled with a decent knowledge of stereotypically feminine clothing, yet as far as I know it sold pretty well. I and the three other people I know with sets in my area all purchased that expansion as soon as possible, and from reading the forums it seems most people have a copy of it as well. Do you have more information on how well it sold compared to the other sets? My information on that is pretty limited (detailed above), so I think knowing that would be immensely helpful. My supposition is that most people won't notice or care if the female artwork is more like the Forcemaster's (leaving behind the heels and corset of course) than the Druid's.
Since you expressed curiosity, neofeminists believe that women are empowered by conventionally feminine attributes. For example, the idea that wearing high-heeled shoes can be empowering if the woman in question wants to wear them.
However, the term neofeminist has also been used by non-feminists to refer to any type of feminism that arose after First-Wave Feminism (suffragettes) or Second-Wave Feminism (which fought for things like reproductive rights), and it's likely that's how sIKE used the term.
@sIKE
The issue is about more than simply being insulted. It's about treating half of the population as sex objects and the social ramifications of that.
Additionally, the "empowerment of women in Greek society" varied from city-state to city-state. In Athens women had few rights; no owning of property, treated essentially as property in terms of marriage (owned first by the father, then by the husband), few were ever taught to read or write, etc. Women in Sparta on the other hand could divorce their husbands, inherit wealth, etc. However, they were still treated essentially as baby-factories. Rights of the Helot women in Sparta were practically non-existent as well. For the most part, only land-owning males in the ancient Greek city-states had any real power or rights, so it's pretty hard to claim that Greek women were empowered. Perhaps your best bet to claim that would be Sparta, but even then it's a stretch because of their slaves.
-
I am grateful that AW is listening and will at least consider the proposal. I am if anything a realist and my original post did not call for AW to ‘change’ any art, only that some ‘alternatives’ become available. The discussion here has grown to encompass the wider issues of the objectification of women in society. I do not believe that AW intentionally sought to objectify women in Mage wars and therefore I have purchased all the products so far and will continue to do so. This is not true of all the media I consume, if I believe there is intent then I will not view such media, here in the UK there are several newspapers that fall into this camp.
I do find the portrayal of women in certain media as insidious and a throwback to societal norms that are archaic. I am not a prude and appreciate the human form when placed in context, in art that does not seek to objectify women or the beauty of my partner. I mention this for I am not the only one within my small gaming group who thinks so –as I stated before I have had some refusals to play Mage Wars based on the artwork – most notably the priestess. I find the in-game artwork less egregious (although my wife has stated that some of the angels are ridiculous!) as they have less focus than the mage characters.
Anyway last post from me on this thread – it is over to AW to consider their response (if any…)
-
I'm may not be personally offended by the artwork (I've seen far worse, so maybe I have become numb to it). HOWEVER, I do understand why people would be turned away from the game. Before I ever read this thread, I had already begun to make new printable versions to sleeve over the original artworks. Fact is this is a social game and half of my gaming group is female. Second, if after being married and I have daughters, I plan to raise them in a way that give them the most control of their destiny (my fiancee and I agreed that we want ALL of our kids trained in self-defense) and a healthy view of their roles within society. In short, I have some empathy for those that do take some offense. The easiest card solution has been the dispel card since it's a matter of simply printing out the one depicting a fully armored female over the woman, who looks like she's wearing a workout bra and panties. To be honest, the replacement looks much cooler. Being an artist and a photoshop adept (16 years of experience), I plan to to this for other cards when I can buy some time. Depending on whether I use found art or my own is entirely up to time constraints. Won't guarentee it, but I might post my replacements. I also won't guarantee they will be enough but it will be toned down.